The openly gay bishop whose consecration led to the crisis over sexuality in the Anglican Communion has accused his evangelical opponents of “idolatry”.
The Bishop of New Hampshire, the Right Rev Gene Robinson, is to defy the Archbishop of Canterbury by turning up uninvited at Canterbury for the Lambeth conference this week.
The Times has learnt that the crisis is likely to worsen, whatever is decided at the conference, because the Episcopal Church of the US plans to overturn its pledge not to consecrate any more openly gay or lesbian bishops.
The US church, which will dominate the conference with 125 bishops attending, is expected then to elect rapidly and consecrate a further five or six such bishops.
Robinson said
“The openly gay bishop whose consecration led to the crisis over sexuality in the Anglican Communion has accused his evangelical opponents of “idolatryâ€.”
=============================================================
I would abuse the protocols of this fine blog and be using “poor taste,” if I were to explicitly describe the objects of Robinson’s idolatry.
If you are going to report something as extreme as an accusation of idolatry, a quote is in order. A bit more validation on the claim that TEC plans multiple new consecrations of gay bishops wouldn’t hurt either.
As to the invasion of Lambeth by the homosexualist forces, perhaps these people will make such a display of themselves that the world will see them for the self-absorbed adolescents they are, prancing and preening and obsessed with the One Thing That Matters.
The idolatry must be my unflagging belief in the Bible, the historic traditions of the Church and the belief in sin and salvation through faith in the Risen Lord. This is apparently to be replaced by the belief in man’s wisdom and man’s ability to improve on the creation of God. Yes I am an Idolater under these circumstances and pray that I would have the grace to always be so.
I also pray for those who have been led a stray by their worship of the secular and know that grace may set them free.
Rlw6
Adding that he was totally orthodox on doctrines such as the Trinity, the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth, he said: “We are fighting over something that is much less than all those. We have raised this one issue of sexuality over and above all the essentials. This is at best unhelpful — and at worst idolatry.â€
I’m the last one to downplay the significance of the creeds, but let’s look at it: did Jesus teach His own Virgin Birth? No. How did Jesus talk about the Trinity? In terms of a precise definition, he only referenced it in the course of teaching other things. The Resurrection? Yes, in this case, He addressed its significance and taught it directly.
Now, how does sexuality match up against these, not in terms of a creed, but in terms of the words our Savior spoke? “Sexual immorality defiles a man.â€
Not essential? Tell it to the Lord. He felt differently. Robinson, on the other hand, is the idolater: he worships his own sex life.
Gene Robinson: “We have raised this one issue of sexuality over and above all the essentials. This is at best unhelpful — and at worst idolatry.â€
St. Paul: “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.” Romans 1:18-25.
I pick St. Paul.
“Adding that he was totally orthodox on doctrines such as the Trinity, the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth …”
Well, and by contrast, Arius was “totally orthodox” on matters of sexual morality, as VGR is not, but so what? The Council of Nicaea condemned Arius for his doctrinal heresies, and his orthodox morality in that context was (and is) totally beside the point. VGR’s conventional orthodoxy on matters that are not, ostensibly, in dispute between his supporters and his opponents is likewise totally beside the point, when the issue is his sodomism.
[blockquote]Adding that he was totally orthodox on doctrines such as the Trinity, the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth, he said: “We are fighting over something that is much less than all those. We have raised this one issue of sexuality over and above all the essentials. This is at best unhelpful — and at worst idolatry.â€[/blockquote]
Here’s the quotation. Make of it what you like; I’ve given up on that man. This camel’s back is broken.
Who was it that “raised this one issue” to the point where it is worth breaking apart the Communion? Oh, yes, the Diocese of New Hampshire and Bishop Robinson. Wanna talk “idolatry”?
NWOhio Anglican – thanks. I missed that quote (and I know to have coffee before commenting, too!). I was looking for something a little more direct. For VGR and his set, one thing matters. If you are wrong on that, you are an idolater.
I really wonder if his understanding of the Trinity and the Resurrection is entirely orthodox. Given the abysmal theology in our church I would be much surprised if he wasn’t in fact somewhat heretical on those points but was too theologically ignorant to know it, or too apathetic to care.
You are entirely right, Chris. It’s very doubtful that VGR actually believes the Creeds in the same sense that Luther and Aquinas and Cranmer and St. Francis and many others did. Remember that only a year or two ago he was giving interviews in which he described with great warmth and approval the way he was encouraged early in his TEC life to recite only those parts of the Nicene Creed which he believed.
I can tell you one thing for certain, however, and that is that if he does now believe in the Creed (in the sense that the great doctors of the church have believed in it), he’d regard it only as a personal and private matter, much in the same way you and I might regard our private devotional habit of genuflection (say). He doesn’t think that belief in a bodily risen Christ or a blood Atonement and an afterlife (etc.) should be NORMATIVE for Episcopalians and certainly would never suggest it should be REQUIRED for bishops and teachers in the church. If he did he’d have to say that his PB (along with Borg and Spong and so forth) was a heretic and should resign; and that he will never do.
Come ON, people. This really doesn’t deserve your attention. Idolatry? The least you can do it laff and laff and larf at such anklebiting. What you do with internal parasites is purge them, and laughter is the best purgative for this particular tapeworm. Garlic is good too, but I would take a cold brewski or two to wash it down. Larry
He frets and struts his way across the stage for now. Let him speak. The more he does the more people get fed up. Hand him the whole stage at Lambeth. Best thing that he can do IS talk….because he doesn’t know when to stop. Something of an idolatry of the self, what.
The man who makes homosexuality his idol is now accusing those who disagree with him of idolatry? A classic case of psychological projection.