Sex and the Episcopalians
Is it really too much to ask for the Church to uphold and defend traditional marriage?
BY: Diane Knippers
The Episcopal Church--often described as the American Establishment at prayer--is holding its General Convention in Minneapolis for the next 10 days. The biggest debates will be about sex. Indeed, the disagreements over sex threaten to shatter not only the 2.3 million-member Episcopal Church, but the 75 million-member Anglican Communion.
What's really odd is that many of the bishops and deputies at the convention seem to be doing everything to avoid actually talking about sex. For the largely comfortable elites that comprise the Episcopal Church, talking about sex isn't, well, proper.
The debate will take two forms. First will be the vote on whether or not to confirm the election of an openly homosexual bishop. Second will be a vote on whether or not to develop liturgies for same-sex unions. Yet the resolution to authorize development of liturgies for same-sex unions doesn't mention homosexuality, gay or lesbian, or, in fact, sex at all. It calls for liturgies to "support all couples living in life-long committed relationships of mutuality and fidelity outside the relationship of marriage."
The pro-homosexual activists want a debate over identity, not behavior. Sexuality is treated simplistically, as something you are born with. If a woman is attracted to another woman, "that's the way God made her." What is ignored is the obvious reality that sexuality is more complicated--a product of nature and nurture, influenced by family, social factors, and even personal habits and choices.
In fact, the left's anthropology reduces humanity to pre-programmed robots. In their view, it is unthinkable that men and women could display self-discipline to control their sexual urges--and cruel for the church to teach that it is possible.
Take, for example,Canon Gene Robinson
, an apparently genial priest whom the Episcopalians of New Hampshire want to be their bishop. Robinson married and fathered two daughters. Then, according to his supporters' story line, he realized his "true" identity. So "integrity" led him to leave his marriage and take a male partner.
This isn't an unfamiliar tale in our society. A man marries and has children. At some point, he realizes that he isn't satisfied with that marriage--with his life, or his wife, or even with this sex life. So, he breaks his marriage vows, walks away from his family, and finds his sexual satisfaction elsewhere. At this point, does it matter if he found himself a trophy wife or a boyfriend? Either way, I find myself wondering, "Why should this man be a bishop? Is this a godly example that bishops are supposed to offer?"