A: The most significant thing that happened was on Tuesday, after the House of Bishops stopped the debate on same-sex blessings and decided to have a smaller group of bishops meet to discuss it further. They said anyone could come, and it turned out it wasn’t a small group at all. There were 25 to 30 of us, and it turned out to be the most significant interaction I’ve had with the bishops since I’ve been elected.
It was profound and it was inspiring. People stood up and spoke their own truth, both the pain and the joy. Everyone spoke honestly about what they needed to go home with, what they could live with and what they couldn’t.
Q: So how do you explain the vote counts? The bishops passed both of these measures resoundingly, and we are starting to hear of many moderate-to-conservative bishops who voted “yes” on both ordinations and gay blessings.
A: Everyone acknowledges they know where this is going, that gay marriage is becoming a reality. But we’re trying to bring our people along. One bishop said to me he voted “no” so he could go home and do this work, as he explained it, “so I can bring my people along.” He used the Nixon in China analogy. This was a bishop who voted “no” on my consent in 2003.
One would think from his whole interview that there was really very little dissent at all from other bishops. So why had he been feeling like he had been getting the cold shoulder. Could this have been a red herring?
Well, they have made their bed. Now they shall live with the consequences. He says he thinks the church will “hold.” He says he hasn’t lost any members since 2003, except one church and that he has 15,000 in his diocese. His credibility is lacking, IMO.
[blockquote] Q: … we are starting to hear of many moderate-to-conservative bishops who voted “yes†on both ordinations and gay blessings.
[Robinson] A: Everyone acknowledges they know where this is going, that gay marriage is becoming a reality. But we’re trying to bring our people along. One bishop said to me he voted “no†so he could go home and do this work, as he explained it, “so I can bring my people along.â€[/blockquote]
This is nothing new; it’s been the strategy for decades. But it is ominous for a diocese like Upper SC where Bishop Henderson (yes on both) only has six months left to “bring us along.”
The big deal is our Bishop search. Several people better ask some really incisive questions during the walkabouts. Dean Linder (presumably a candidate) spoke forcefully in favor that “God has called and may call” non-celibate gays as priests and bishops.
Arrogant. And, again, to hear it stated nakedly that he will yoke his organization to the culture, that the culture leads, and that is the right thing to do, is chilling. This is almost literally bowing one’s head to Baal.
The last line–regarding the 10 minutes after the same-sex blessings vote–nobody moved: ” It was almost as if we didn’t want to leave each other.” Oh please Gene! It’s called shock–for those who finally triumphed in battle and for those who were crushed.
[i]“We don’t want to raise our daughters in a church that doesn’t value young people in our church.†[/i]
?????????
Is he talking about CINO’s who want their daughters to have the “right” to be ordained?
I laughed out loud at the comment, too, Ed – not for your reason (though I agree with it), but because his church, relatively speaking, has no young people. I’m pretty certain my daughter doesn’t want to be raised in a parish made up exclusively of 20 or 30 aging white baby boomers, always ranting on about gay sex and how much they hate George Bush and Karl Rove (and, in many ways, I’m no admirer of George Bush).
Sorry, you may not be “Ed the Roman” – just “the roman.” But I meant #5.
such tripe, but yet i know he is telling the truth about bishops ‘moving people along’. what does that say about those that would herd their flock into the handbasket? it is shameful and infuriating. if this outrage won’t budge these remaining orthodox churches to leave then absolutely nothing will and we will see that they never had a strong conviction about it either way. and phil, that may be true but i also used to rant about gwbush and karl rove, those two deserved every bit and more… although never at church.
This to me this was the most chilling statement by Robinson:
[blockquote]Another bishop said that in his diocese he will never have to deal with gay marriage. I told him, you don’t know where this is going. Gay marriage could go to the Supreme Court, it could become the law of the land. Maybe part of your responsibility is to get your people ready for where the country is going. [/blockquote]
I gather that the Simple Country Bishop is unfamiliar with the separation of church and state. Civil marriage/union/whatever is NOT A FREAKIN’ SACRAMENT!!!!!!!!!!!