The openly gay bishop whose ordination sparked the crisis in the Anglican Communion has claimed the Church of England would be close to shutting down if it was forced to manage without its gay clergy.
The Bishop of New Hampshire in the US, the Right Rev Gene Robinson, who is divorced and lives openly in partnership with a gay man, said he found it “mystifying” that the mother church of the Anglican Communion was unable to be honest about the number of gay clergy in its ranks.
He said many of the English church’s clergy lived openly in their rectories with gay partners, with the full knowledge of their bishops. But he criticised the stance of bishops who threaten the clergy with emnity should their relationships become public.
Speaking in an interview in London, Bishop Gene said: “I have met so many gay partnered clergy here and it is so troubling to hear them tell me that their bishop comes to their house for dinner, knows fully about their relationship, is wonderfully supportive but has also said if this ever becomes public then I’m your worst enemy.
This man reminds me strongly of someone who hopes, by screaming loudly enough that fiction will become reality or a three dimensional world becoming two dimensional.
I love the nameless gay clergy and the nameless supporting bishops.
Actually, I there are fourteen nameless people typing on this computer right now – this statement has as much validity as any of his.
By “lost” he means “there would be positions unfilled.” CofE, like TEC, has its share of clergy serving empty buildings, going to conferences, sitting on committees and the like. Yes, the institution might be “lost.” But one can argue that it is already lost by worrying too much about cultural institutions and non-Gospel priorities.
#1 Ecipse. Let me add some fuel to your fire. Was it not the German minister of Propoganda in the early 1930’s who was quoted as saying “Tell a lie big enough and long enough and people will believe it.”?
Robinson makes no sense. He says he had ‘a great relationship’ with his wife, yet they divorced. Why? Was it because his homosexual desires had become dominant in his life? What triggered this crisis? Robinson has never explained.
Gene mentions in the interview that in his beginning years in TEC there was a lot of the Nicene Creed he didn’t believe. He’s mentioned that before. I found another interview where a much sounder reporter followed up on that and asked:
Two things I find interesting. The first is that he does not say anywhere that he loves the Nicene Creed because it is true. Rather he says he likes to say it because it gives him a beautiful experience of being connected to people.
The second is that even his claim to “believe all of it” — whatever Gene means by believe, since it apparently is not primarily the NC’s truth claims that are of interest to him — even that claim is probably bogus, since he adds the caveat that “I might articulate the meaning of the Nicene Creed differently than would have been explained 1,000 years ago or 1,700 years ago.” That’s a typical loophole used by liberals who still recite the creed today. Thus, they say they believe in a Virgin Birth, or a Resurrection — but not a “literal” one. I wish the reporter back then had followed up further and asked him to give examples of how his meaning of the creed would be different from that of Augustine or Cranmer or Aquinas.
Actually, the Church of England would be better off without those who live a double life. We are always hearing calls for “openness” and “honesty” – anyone who is living a life which contradicts Christian teaching but is publicly identified as one of its ministers is quite simply living a lie, and any Church would be better off without such people. Let’s have openness and honesty and clergy who live according to the standards of the Gospels – in all the churches.
I think it terms of facts there simply aren’t any figures on how many clergy live in partnered non-celibate same sex relationships. A survey after a year of civil partnerships revealed 77 clergy who said they had had entered into such partnerships. I would also expect, if the clercal community parallels the non-clerical, that there is a larger proportion of gay clergy in London than the national average. Whether this justifies Bishop Robinson’s rhetoric, I think views will differ.
I want to try something:
[blockquote] ‘I think the thing that is the most mystifying to me and the most troubling about the Church of England is its refusal to be honest about just how many [b]alcoholic[/b] clergy it has – many of them drinking at parties and serving alcohol for dinner in the rectories. I have met so many [b]alcoholic[/b] clergy here and it is so troubling to hear them tell me that their bishop comes to their house for dinner, knows fully about their drinking habits, is wonderfully supportive but has also said if this ever becomes public then I’m your worst enemy. It’s a terrible way to live your life and I think it’s a terrible way to be a church. I think integrity is so important. What does it mean for a clergy person to be in a pulpit calling the parishioners to a life of integrity when they can’t even live a life of integrity with their own bishop and their own church? So I would feel better about the Church of England’s stance, its reluctance to support the Episcopal Church in what it has done if it would at least admit that this not an American problem and just an American challenge. If all the [b]alcoholic[/b] people stayed away from church on a given Sunday the Church of England would be close to shut down between its organists, its clergy, its wardens…..it just seems less than humble not to admit that.'[/blockquote]
or how about this:
[blockquote] ‘I think the thing that is the most mystifying to me and the most troubling about the Church of England is its refusal to be honest about just how many [b]adulterous[/b] clergy it has – many of them with an illegitimate child being supported with their slaries. I have met so many [b]adulterous[/b] clergy here and it is so troubling to hear them tell me that their bishop comes to their house for dinner, knows fully about their sexual improprieties, is wonderfully supportive but has also said if this ever becomes public then I’m your worst enemy. It’s a terrible way to live your life and I think it’s a terrible way to be a church. I think integrity is so important. What does it mean for a clergy person to be in a pulpit calling the parishioners to a life of integrity when they can’t even live a life of integrity with their own bishop and their own church? So I would feel better about the Church of England’s stance, its reluctance to support the Episcopal Church in what it has done if it would at least admit that this not an American problem and just an American challenge. If all the [b]adulterous[/b] people stayed away from church on a given Sunday the Church of England would be close to shut down between its organists, its clergy, its wardens…..it just seems less than humble not to admit that.'[/blockquote]
I quite agree with you Vincent. We are all sinful creatures but the majority of us acknowledge our sin and seek forgiveness and freedom from the sin from our Lord. In the case above, you have clergy who are deliberately living a lie. No recognition of sin, no fulness of transformed life, and hence one’s witness of the fruits of His Spirit are compromised to the lost and to the converted.
I was reading Episcopal Cafe earlier today and when I clicked the link to the Times in looking at the time, they had only just put it up on their site.
Interesting that he is claiming to have met the ABC who appears to be back in the UK and who apparently asked him not to exercise certain episcopal functions.
What is one to make of all this?
Near the end of the interview Gene Robinson made a wisecrack about the pope claiming the Catholic Church was the One True Church and that the Episcopal Church was only “playing” at being a church.
However, it is the Robinson situation that convinces many, and not just Catholics, that such is the case.
There are gay clergy in the CofE along with gay people in other positions and probably always have been as there are in all walks of life. However I think it is stretching it to suggest that we are going to grind to a halt if they left and indeed there is absolutely no suggestion that anyone is going to be asked to leave.
That is a long way from the suggestion that our teaching varies from what we agreed at Communion level or that we should back TEC in the approach it has taken. We are not going to do so and the ball is still firmly in TEC’s Court to give an answer to the issues they have to address. I hope that all this means that there has been some movement with Lambeth’s efforts but I resent what appear to be Bishop Robinson’s attempts to create mischief in the CofE with his remarks.
There is an old way of describing someone, which I think fits VGR to a tee:
“you old silver tongued devil, you”………………..
Frightening, and more so by the numbers who support him. To me the whole interview is pure claptrap, politically correct, touchy-feely stuff………….and we must remember, there is no sin anymore; we can do whatever we like as long as it feels good.
#8, some excellent word substitutions!
I fully agree with #6 & #9 above
the whole notion of punishment being meted out to provinces of the Anglican Communion that are somehow non-compliant is somehow antithetical to the whole Anglican tradition, positing some sort of centralised Curia that has the ability and the authority to do such a thing, is about as un-Anglican as you can imagine.
un-Anglican but seemingly not un-episcopal when you witness the flurry of lawsuits and threats of litigation against those in The Epsicopal Church who wish to leave and take their property with them. Suddenly Anglicans become very litigious, and concerned about enforcing church discipline…
Two questions:
1.) Does anyone believe the parish doesn’t know what’s going on in the rectory?
2.) What self-respecting gay couple would tolerate such an arrangement? Is religious work in the U.K. so lucrative they can’t get a better job and make a living honestly?
This blind eye-turning does seem to have backfired spectacularly in the Hereford case.
Anselmic: “seemingly not un-episcopal when you witness the flurry of lawsuits and threats of litigation against those in The Epsicopal Church who wish to leave and take their property with them”
It’s not “their” property.
For a conservative’s take on it ([i]not[/i] a reappraiser’s), check +Howe’s recent letter.
I find every time I have to read an interview by VGR my respect for him lowers. I don’t know if it is because his “facts” are so unfactual yet spoken with such confidence or whether it is because he seems to be unable to conceive of anything outside of the gay issue.
I do think, however, having him make these interviews is in the reasserters best interests. I suspect even his supporters think the same.
[b]driver8[/b] you are quite right. The London area has a much higher proportion of gay clerics than anywhere else in the UK, despite attempts made by a former Scottish Primus to challenge London’s record. It dates back to the nineteenth century when toleration was achieved not just for ritualism, but for the lifestyle which unfortunately went with it.
When Mr Robinson visits the UK he no doubt finds himself immediately surrounded by sympathisers from the gay underworld and therefore forms the impression that a very large proportion of Anglican ministers share his preoccupation.
It is simply not true outside London, except for tiny pockets in one or two major cities north and south of the border.
The Roman Catholic clergy by contrast, include a number of those who are predisposed towards homosexuality, but who understand and practice the vow of celibacy which they took at ordination. One very rarely hears of this vow being broken, except for those who are leaving to be married (and join the Episcopal Church!)
I completely share GR’s dislike of the hypocrisy of the present situation and his hunger for more integrity. But what is he trying to say here? That institutional needs should drive our theological stance? God forbid. I love the Church of England, but I’d rather see it collapse than depart even a single inch from the word and will of God.
Not that I think that this, in fact, is the choice before us.
& why is Robinson making all these border crossings? Didn’t he say he’d be a bishop for NH’s (tiny number of) Episcopalians?
Yes, PadreWayne – we all know it’s not “theirs” and legally belongs to hijackers instead. But some of us are unlearning that principle.
To 21 Peter dh, What I don’t understand is the logic employed by some people. The Christian religion does not condone sexual immoraltity including homosexual behavior. People join a Christian church and discover they are homosexual or proclaim they are homosexual then demand the institution change to accommodate them for the sake of integrity! Integrity would demand that these folks have enought respect for the institution to leave the institutions beliefs and values in place. Integrity and respect are a two way street.
CoE closing down just as ECUSA/TEC is swelling from gays? Both predictions of VGR. Now, what were the requirements for prophets to have a legitimate message? The events were to come to reality, weren’t they? Seems we have two strikes at this point in the ball game. Does one get more than three in cricket?
In 1970 my wife and I lived in a Church of England vicarage for a month while the vicar took a vacation and I took the Sunday services. My parents had done the same the year before. We arrived the day before the vicar left and left the day after he returned. He vacationed with a friend from Scotland whom I met when they returned. I did not ask about his sexual orientation, but the parishioners reported that he was homosexual but did not have any sexual relationships in the vicarage. Some things have changed; some have not.
I think the Episcopal church should have taken the advice given by the large majority of the bishops at Lambeth 1998 and refrained from approving the election of Canon Robinson.
Tom Rightmyer in Asheville, NC.
Ah. So, gay C of E priests are just doing jobs that straight C of E members won’t do!
But this tells us that the ABC has problems in his own bedroom, so to speak, that he needs to clear up and out before he takes on the same problems in other peoples’ bedrooms. Now, I daresay that the ABC is well aware of the things that go bump in the night in his own church, and I suspect that there is nothing he can do about it. Indeed, I wonder if he does wish to change anything?
Will the CofE fall apart if they fire all the homosexual priests? I don’t know, but I do know that the CofE is slowly dying and needs to revitalized itself, a rejuvenation that will not take place as long as all England knows the kind of bordello the vicarage has become. The Romans are trying to clean out their own stables, and they are not dead yet, even though a number of the mules have been sent to the knackers’ hammer. Indeed, it is likely that this purifying of the ranks may be just what the Doctor ordered.
Gene who?
Vincent Coles made the same point I have made about Ritualism. Homosexuality came boldly into the Church along with it. It carved out a safe space for gay men, a space of incense and vestments delicately tailored and embroidered with lace, and respectful congregations who called you Father First Name.