Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams was quoted Saturday as saying he is not opposed to the appointment of gay people as bishops, if they pledge to remain celibate.
Williams, the spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion, was quoted as telling the Times of London that he could in the future support the appointment of homosexual bishops ”” but not those in active sexual relationships.
“To put it very simply, there’s no problem about a gay person who’s a bishop. It’s about the fact that there are traditionally, historically, standards that the clergy are expected to observe. So there’s always a question about the personal life of the clergy,” Williams was quoted as telling the newspaper.
headline is a non story but that he answered ‘pass’ when asked if they should one day be allowed a sexual partner speaks volumes….
They should [b]never[/b] be allowed sexual partners, and celibacy for them should be [b]permanent.[/b]
I have problems with a person with homosexual tendancies being a pastor. A pastorate is not a civil right. There are many reasons why a person should not be a pastor. That is NOT to say that there is no ministry for those who tend toward homosexuality. I have a good friend who spent most of his life within homosexual practice and influence, as saved and he is a clear and winning testimony for Jesus Christ – and his old friends hate him.
I also note the quote: “Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams was quoted Saturday as saying he is not opposed to the appointment of gay people as bishops, if they pledge to remain celibate.”
A “pledge” is insufficient evidence of abstinence. I’m not sure what is but a pledge, by itself, is worthless.
Don
#3, such a pastor would be no different that your or my own, who is struggling with his or her own sins despite asking God for the grace not to be tempted by them.
#4 Manna, Exactly. Christendom and its history are full of pastors, prelates, and popes who struggle(d) with a host of tendencies and sins. The only difference now is that a few want to be “out and proud” about their tendencies rather than trying to keep a modicum of discretion and decorum.
And it IS a few who are public about it. We likely have many religious leaders who struggle quietly and privately with a variety of issues but keep up an impenetrable facade so few know. If they serve honorably and faithfully, then MUST we know? In this age of Facebook, is everything we are, ponder, and fight absolutely everyone’s business?
Personally, I don’t do Facebook and my answer is “no.”
What are we being softened up for?
Such a pastor, Four, is probably nonexistent now. Since when has celibacy been an attribute of any homosexual> the very reverse indeed., You are supposing a theoretical being who belongs in the same class as TEC’s “faithful, monogamous same sex couple.” We have already heard from the journalist in San Fran about how “monogamous” same sex couples are. Larry
This is how error gains a foothold in the church.
I feel the need to clarify with Scripture the duty of all of us, but especially pastors, in living a holy life under grace and in humility. It is not by excusing ourselves that we find grace but it is by the pursuit of Him alone who can heal and give strength.
1Cr 9:27 But I keep under my body, and bring [it] into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.
1Pe 4:2 That he no longer should live the rest of [his] time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.
2Pe 2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
God is worthy of worship. Do so, today.
Don
How does he feel about adulterers?
No. 10 – I have always assumed that the theological objection to orders for practising homosexuals is precisely the same as objection to adulterers. I doubt that he would distinguish between them. Should we?