Not content with having brought his own denomination to the brink of schism and collapse, Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson toddled into Washington to spread the joy to United Methodists. According to Jeff Walton of the Institute for Religion and Democracy, he preached last Sunday at Foundry United Methodist Church, and invited them to follow him down the yellow brick road:
A United Methodist congregation should conduct same-sex marriages despite church law prohibiting them, according to Bishop Gene Robinson of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire.
Robinson and his fellow gay activists have turned the Episcopal Church’s canon law into a hunk of Swiss cheese through selective enforcement. The result is a denomination where congregations, priests and members are fleeing in droves, and anyone who is not sold out to the activists’ agenda feels as though they are in headquarters’ cross-hairs. So naturally he wants Methodists to join the party. It’s no surprise that Foundry can’t wait to do so:
Foundry states on its website: “We are conscious of positions that The United Methodist Church has taken that are opposed to same-gender marriage, but those aspects of church discipline are in conflict with the deeper emphasis of the church’s Book of Discipline upon the gospel of grace and pastoral care for all of God’s children.”
Translation of “gospel of grace and pastoral care for all of God’s children”: of course you should be able to boink anyone you want. What kind of a killjoy would say otherwise?
Robinson’s presence at Foundry and message to the congregation served to demonstrate the Washington church’s position as being at odds with that of the denomination.
“Our preacher of the morning is often introduced as the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church, but that is not particularly why we invited him here this Sunday,” Snyder said.
No, I’m sure that was a total coincidence. I’m sure they asked Pittsburgh Bishop Bob Duncan (head of the breakaway evangelical Anglican Church in North America) first, but he was busy.
The New Hampshire bishop explained that change happens when a person begins with a worldview that interprets the world and the things that happen in it.
“Then along comes an experience for which that worldview is insufficient and inadequate to explain and incorporate this experience,” Robinson said, explaining that the person then enters into a kind of chaos. “Coming out on the other side, you either have to deny the reality of that experience or you come out on the other side with a revised and transformed worldview that now takes that experience into account. That is exactly what the church, the synagogue, the mosque all over the world is encountering now with homosexuality.”
That’s precisely what happened to Robinson. His theology (which from what I’ve heard is–or was–substantially more evangelical than that of most Episcopal gay activists), not to mention the Bible, collided head-on with his sexual desires. Guess which won.
Robinson connected his account of change and homosexuality with Acts, chapter 3, where St. Peter heals the crippled beggar at the temple gate.
“If you are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, that is your story. That is my story. We know what it is like to be told you can only come so far,” Robinson said. “Do you know what it is like to sit at the door and beg, to be told that our affliction makes it not okay to come to the center of the church’s life? We know what it is like when someone in the name of Jesus tells us to stand up and walk, that we are loved beyond our loudest imagining, that we too are God’s children and that we too are beneficiaries, heirs of God’s creation. We run into the temple and we proclaim God’s love.”
“Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people are coming into the temple and they are bringing their beloved partners and they’re saying it’s God that has done this,” Robinson continued. “What happened in the ancient temple was that the powers that be got really mad.”
I read stuff like this, and I can’t help but wonder: is he being deceptive, or can he simply not read? The apostles didn’t just offer the beggar entry into the Temple; P
eter healed him (or rather, God did through Peter). Robinson wants to believe that he should be admitted to the Temple, not only without being healed, but with God putting His stamp of approval on his ailment. The healing of the beggar on Solomon’s Porch was a miracle of divine transformation, which folks such as Robinson would maintain is not only not necessary, but decry as offensive to who they are. He’s happy engaging in behavior that Scripture prohibits; why can’t God be just as thrilled?
July 21, 2010 at 8:49 pm
He is not being deceptive. He is convinced that he has discovered truth. He is operating under a self delusion. Under the power of his delusion he has created a “theology of personal experience.”
It would make perfect sense to most denominations to depose him. T.E.C. is currently controlled by people who are under the same delusion as Bishop Robinson. I can say this because I am still in T.E.C. Let us pray that this cancer does not metastasize to other denominations.
July 23, 2010 at 1:19 pm
The United Methodists may not follow him, because of the growth in their African constituency and the relative strength of the their Southern US conferences, but I think the PC(USA) and ELCA are going to do so. It’s just a matter of time.
July 23, 2010 at 1:46 pm
One of the great things about our country is the ability to engage in civil debate, and I appreciate having the opportunity to read your views here. However, I (and I should point out that I am a cradle Episcopalian) was in attendance at Foundry UMC when Bishop Robinson spoke, and I am curious as to whether you listened to his sermon in its entirety (which is available on the church’s website). I have concerns that much of the anger and pain that people feel about his consecration as a bishop is perpetuated by offering only selected excerpts of sermons, talks, etc.; in reading this post, it appears you relied on a single source – Jeff Walton’s piece – and excerpted selectively from that.
Second, I must take issue with your understanding of the situation in the ECUSA where “congregations, priests and members are fleeing in droves.” Of the 7,100 individual parishes in the ECUSA, 83 have left – that’s 1.1 percent.
In the comment above, Undergroundpewster refers to feeling that Bishop Robinson has discovered truth and is operating under self-delusion. I would contend that it is not delusion or the discovery of truth, but an understanding of the Bible as he has arrived at it. One of the marvelous things about any Christian denomination is that, for millenia, Christians have engaged in deep study of the Bible and n the area of scriptural interpretation. Just as you and I may disagree over whether the Bible is literally the word of God or rather man’s understanding of God’s word, our understanding of the Bible and the meaning that we get may also differ. I’m confident that Undergroundpewster would be offended if someone felt that his understnading of the Bible was wrong and called him deluded. No matter our differences of opinion, any debate – in the realm of theology or anywhere else – should always be tempered with respect. My wife and I have differences of opinion from time to time on church issues, but we view each other’s opinions – and always those of others – with respect.
Finally, with regard to your last paragraph, a listening of the complete sermon would clarify the use of Acts 3. I agree completely that God healed the man through Peter and John, but it was not God that allowed the newly-healed man into the Temple – it was that he finally met the rules of man that finally allowed him into the Temple. It was not just healing, however, but a new view of this person by the Temple officials – just as the view of the ECUSA towards ALL of our brothers and sisters has changed and they are being welcomed.
The sign which hangs outside of each Episcopal parish reads, “The Episcopal Church welcomes you” – there are no asterisks, no conditions, and no requirements. I believe that we are living into that promise through the inclusion of everyone in the various aspects of life in the church.
Again, thanks for providing a place for this debate.
July 23, 2010 at 2:55 pm
False teachers like Bishop Robinson are a cause for us to grieve over the Church. We respect their dignity by praying for them to cease and desist from spreading a self discovered “truth” that is contrary to the wisdom of the Apostles.
July 23, 2010 at 5:07 pm
[...] sermon as a whole. I will admit that I haven’t listened to the sermon that provoked this post (I will do so when I get a chance, however). I responded off of Jeff Walton’s report (found at [...]
July 23, 2010 at 5:54 pm
There are no astericks, no conditions, and no requirements to be welcomed in ACNA churches, either.
July 23, 2010 at 6:13 pm
Kate: There are no asterisks for congregants, that’s true – but there are asterisks for clergy.
Cheers,
Matt
July 23, 2010 at 8:07 pm
There are qualifications for any kind of leadership position, of course. I can’t speak for TEC, but the Anglican Church of Canada has astericks for clergy. My parish supplied over half the ordinands for the Diocese of Ottawa. About three years before we departed for ANiC, every single postulant from my parish was refused, presumably for being too orthodox. It cuts both ways.
July 25, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Why is it that so many, such as this blogger, will promote and perpetuate exclusion, hate, misunderstanding, divisiveness, and character assassination, when Robinson and Foundry are promoting and perpetuating acceptance, reconciliation, inclusion, and support for all of God’s children? Hmmm.
July 25, 2010 at 4:54 pm
Wow. Feel the love. No argument, of course, just ad hominem attack, impugning of motives, and simple name-calling. I guess if that’s all you’ve got, that’s what you go with. Tell you what, John: come back when you’re ready to actually deal with the arguments rather than sling mud, OK?