Gay NH Episcopal Bishop to Marry "Partner"

  • Thread starter Thread starter rr1213
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
francesco920 said:
Hmm, I wonder if Presiding “Bishop” Schori will approve of this “marriage”?

Ironically, this “marriage” just might result in a schism. I don’t see how the more conservative Anglican prelates can stand for this blatant rejection of basic Christian doctrine.
Click to expand...
Oh, they don’t stand for it. In some countries the local bishops forbid their parishioners from even speaking to American Episcopalians. I can’t say as I blame them, really.

As for the conservative folk within the churches, well, we ran to the Tiber and jumped in. Others are, too.

The Episcopal Church has lost its way. I pray for it, but I want nothing to do with it.
 
Jayda said:
hola

does anybody know if the Church considers their apostolic succession and ordinations valid?

gracias
Dominus Vobiscum
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church does not regard their ordinations or apostolic succession as valid.:ouch:
 
“As for the conservative folk within the churches, well, we ran to the Tiber and jumped in. Others are, too.”

Well, get dried off and a warm welcome to the Church. I will keep pointing out the river.😉
 
hosemonkey said:
“As for the conservative folk within the churches, well, we ran to the Tiber and jumped in. Others are, too.”

Well, get dried off and a warm welcome to the Church. I will keep pointing out the river.😉
Click to expand...
Thanks–my hair is still a little wet, but I know I am Home:D
 
I’m NOT AT ALL condoning or supporting Gene Robinson and his activities - so don’t try to go down that road with me. But, let’s also confine ourselves to accuracy, OK? 👍

The two are not going to “marry” - even by their own terminology. They have announced that they intend to take advantage of the new CIVIL UNION law in NH, assuming it does take effect. They are referring to it as civil union, as does the proposed NH legislation. They would PREFER to be able to be married, but they are taking what they can get.
 
Servant1 said:
I’m NOT AT ALL condoning or supporting Gene Robinson and his activities - so don’t try to go down that road with me. But, let’s also confine ourselves to accuracy, OK? 👍

The two are not going to “marry” - even by their own terminology. They have announced that they intend to take advantage of the new CIVIL UNION law in NH, assuming it does take effect. They are referring to it as civil union, as does the proposed NH legislation. They would PREFER to be able to be married, but they are taking what they can get.
Click to expand...
Your point is well taken. Nonetheless, the differences from a legal and social context between “marriage” and “civil union” are slight and, with the passage of time and growing acceptance of the concept, those differences will soon disappear. Mark my words, in 20 years all the states will recognize “marriage” between homosexual couples.
 
Gerry_Hunter said:
Turns out that when it was time for him to take up with another man
Click to expand...
For the hundredth time, there is no evidence whatever that Robinson left his wife to “take up with another man.” He did not meet his current partner for some years, and for all we know he was celibate until then. Charity *requires *us to assume the best in the absence of evidence.

The persistent repetition of the calumny that +Robinson left his wife “for his gay lover” only discredits conservatives–it makes the job of articulating the orthodox Christian view of this issue much harder. Please refrain from this kind of careless, unjust, and uncharitable language–if you don’t care for the intrinsic moral issue of calumny, have some regard for your conservative Anglican brothers and sisters whose witness you are making far more difficult than it needs to be!

In Christ,

Edwin
 
Even if the state does recognize same-sex “marriage”, it would still be “civil”…Catholics would not be bound by it in their church…civil marriage and sacramental marriage are often confused…but they are different…one CAN have one without the other.
 
Regardless of the legalistic hair-splitting and wether you call it marriage or domestic partnership, it is still an attempt to legitimize what has always been regarded as a disgusting perversion. The fact that one of the perpetrators wears the mantle of “Bishop” however illigitimate makes the sin even more egregious. The frog is slowly boiled and if you object, then you are “unloving”, “homophobic” “judgmental” etc etc etc ad nauseum. That this would even been considered fifty years ago would have been unthinkable. The whole concept of same-sex “marriage” cheapens the institution and simply makes mockery of the sacrament. The term “domestic partnership” IMO is just a back-door method of achieving the same end. Shame.
 
Does anyone else think the timing of this seems a little contirved?

That is to say, It would seem to be intended to force the hand and direction of TEC.
 
ASimpleSinner said:
Does anyone else think the timing of this seems a little contirved?

That is to say, It would seem to be intended to force the hand and direction of TEC.
Click to expand...
No. TEC has already committed to ignore the requirements of the Primates as set forth during the Tanzania conference. Bishop Robinson knows that TEC is not willing to “turn its back” on his ordination, so I doubt that his actions are that calculated. But who knows…?
 
Jedda said:
My feeling is, I dont agree or think it is right in any way, but I would not stop anyone for getting married to a same sex partner. I feel it is a topic God will cover when they leave this earth, I will not judge, that is not my job. 🤷
Click to expand...
It isn’t being judgemental to look at an action, compare it to the plan God has for those he created in his image and likeness, see it to be a radical departure from that plan, and declare it to be so. It would only become “judgement” if one took it upon one’s self to pronounce the damnation of those who took a particular action. That, indeed, is God’s “job”.

We must be on our guard against being tricked into abandonning discernment because someone calls it “judgement.” When God advised that by their fruits we shall know them, he appointed us all fruit inspectors. And where coupling is directed towards two people of the same sex, the fruit is bad, and must never be said to be otherwise. The people involved are, first of all, to be prayed for, but their action is never to be excused or condoned. Forgiven if repented of, yes, but not excused or condoned.

Blessings,

Gerry
 
Hi,

Im not sure how many of you know this but a couple of years ago the NJ Governor McGreevy resigned becasue he is gay. Now on the news today it says he is thinking about becoming a gay episcopal minister:eek: :eek:

Oh MY!!!1
 
ALLFORHIM said:
Hi,

Im not sure how many of you know this but a couple of years ago the NJ Governor McGreevy resigned becasue he is gay. Now on the news today it says he is thinking about becoming a gay episcopal minister:eek: :eek:

Oh MY!!!1
Click to expand...
Well, there you go. One insult upon another.🤷
 
ALLFORHIM said:
Hi,

Im not sure how many of you know this but a couple of years ago the NJ Governor McGreevy resigned becasue he is gay. Now on the news today it says he is thinking about becoming a gay episcopal minister:eek: :eek:

Oh MY!!!1
Click to expand...
Oy
 
rr1213 said:
Oy
Click to expand...
The news just said as a teenager he wanted to become a catholic priest because he was raised catholic.

So now he has been accepted into the episcopalian seminary.:rolleyes:

I just dont get how they deal with scripture that speaks of homosexuality being a sin.😦

Anyway-his ex-wife made a comment that he has to be in the spotlight and she cant believes his arrogance.

I guess the governor scandal wasnt enough for him.🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top