Posted on 06/22/2011 4:01:20 AM PDT by Cronos
The Church of England is ready to approve the appointment of openly gay bishops, providing that they are celibate.
Britain's established church was to publish its legal advice on the issue yesterday in an attempt to clarify its policy following years of controversy and debate.
The document, Choosing Bishops - The Equality Act 2010, summarises the points that those involved in the nomination process ''need to keep in mind'' when considering candidates in order to avoid breaking the law.
It states there is no bar to the promotion of gay clergy to a bishopric as long as they are not sexually active and never have been while in the priesthood.
However, the document says a selection committee could veto a gay candidate if ''the appointment of the candidate would cause division and disunity within the diocese in question''.
The document reads: ''A person's sexual orientation is in itself irrelevant to their suitability for episcopal office or indeed ordained ministry'' but the Equality Act ''allows churches and religious organisations to impose a requirement that someone should not be in a civil partnership or impose a requirement related to sexual orientation … to avoid conflicting with the strongly held religious convictions of a significant number of the religion's followers''.
''It is clearly the case that a significant number of Anglicans … believe that a Christian leader should not enter into a civil partnership, even if celibate, because it involves forming an exclusive, lifelong bond with someone of the same sex, creates family ties and is generally viewed in wider society as akin to same-sex marriage. It is equally clear that many other Anglicans believe that it is appropriate that clergy who are gay by orientation enter into civil partnerships, even though the discipline of the church requires them to remain sexually abstinent.''
The guidance, to be presented to the General Synod in York next month, comes after damaging revelations about the church hierarchy refusing to accept the reality of gay clergy. Documents obtained by The Guardian showed the House of Bishops unable to agree on whether gay clergy should ever be appointed to the episcopate and that meetings about candidates descended into shouting matches.
Much of the debate has centred on Jeffrey John, a celibate priest who is in a longstanding civil partnership with another cleric. He was forced by the Archbishop of Canterbury to stand down after being appointed suffragan bishop of Reading eight years ago after conservative evangelicals objected.
Last year, the archbishops of Canterbury and York prevented him becoming the Bishop of Southwark, to the dismay of his supporters.
The guidelines have angered those campaigning for greater inclusion in the Church of England. General Synod member Christina Rees warned that the guidance was ''too open'' for people to exploit as they could argue that the appointment of a gay bishop could prove divisive at home or overseas.
The Anglican communion remains at odds over the issue of gay bishops, even though the Episcopal Church in the United States has made two such appointments in the past decade.
“providing that they are celibate.”
Uh huh.
My son was preparing for Anglican priesthood.
He has left over the gay priest issue (he’s against it!) and entered nursing school.
Your son is a wise man.
How can one be openly gay and celibate?
These people are skating on thin ice.
What they actually are saying is that they will take a person’s word that he is celibate and not only have them as priests, but will promote them to Bishop, until they get caught.
The bible says that no “abuser of themselves with mankind”, AKA homosexual, will inherit the kingdom of God. So the Anglicans want people who are going to hell to lead their churches? Obviously the greater Anglican church is not Christian.
Didn’t they learn their lesson from “bishop” vicky?
Yeah, “celibate” just means one hasn’t had sex the past few days.
How in the hell can you be gay and celibate?
Its BS and the Church elders know it.It allows them to pretend they are believing this BS they are being fed.
Sell a bit here, sell a bit there. Never give it away for free.
But it got me to thinking ... that's the problem, and it is so with this situation with the Anglican Church/Gay Bishops. For example, if a prostitute wants to join the church, she should be welcomed, it doesn't matter what she DID, it is what she DOES ... if she changed her ways because of the church, then the process is working. That's the way its supposed to work. Using that analogy, the Episcopal church takes in the prostitute, but doesn't require her to change her ways ... just "love her" as you would anyone else. So this church welcomes anybody and NOBODY is disciplined to change their ways. Great place for gays, drug dealers, pedophiles ... they are all welcome and all will be loved by the bleeding heart liberals running the place... and these misfits are not there to change their ways, they are there continuing to do what the church teaches is wrong. And then this statement: openly gay bishops, providing that they are celibate ... need I say more?
“How can one be openly gay and celibate?”
How can one be openly tempted by gambling or alcohol, and resist?
Homosexuality is a sin, not the only sin. Someone who has homosexual lusts but by God’s grace refuses to give in to temptation can be a Christian.
We have a traditional Anglican diocese in the US. HushTX is a member of this. Perhaps they are an option? I would love to have the conservative, traditional Anglicans join the Catholic Church and enrich us, but if not, the traditional Anglicans are a way.
The AFricans are large in number but low on influence and money.
You are correct. The 'love' without repentance is the folly of the Anglican church now
The phrase "openly gay" means having stated your have a homosexual orientation. Celibacy is about controlling one's behavior and would be just as true for "openly straight" priests.
I don't know what the Anglican's say but for Catholics, celibacy or more correctly chastity is the life homosexuals are called to whether priests or not.
Good point. If you really loved someone, you would want the best for them. If you really loved someone, and saw they were doing wrong, then you would be obliged to tell them that, no matter how hurtful that might be for them (or you for that matter). Love is not a weak thing.
That’s true. We are all “works in progress”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.