Wednesday, February 10, 2010

The ABC, what Jesus would do, and me

Please explain this to me, from the ABC's speech to his C of E synod.

The Archbishop of Canterbury continues to rebuke TEC, criticizing the nomination of Mary Glasspool for Suffragen Bishop in LA.
The freedom claimed, for example, by the Episcopal Church to ordain a partnered homosexual bishop is, simply as a matter of fact, something that has a devastating impact on the freedom of, say, the Malaysian Christian to proclaim the faith without being cast as an enemy of public morality and risking both credibility and personal safety.
This is the first I've heard about the Malaysian. That's the same as the lesbian bishop? How and why?

He conflates GLBT equality with euthanasia.
The debate over the status and vocational possibilities of LGBT people in the Church is not helped by ignoring the existing facts, which include many regular worshippers of gay or lesbian orientation and many sacrificial and exemplary priests who share this orientation. There are ways of speaking about the question that seem to ignore these human realities or to undervalue them; I have been criticised for doing just this, and I am profoundly sorry for the carelessness that could give such an impression. Equally, there are ways of speaking about the assisted suicide debate that treat its proponents as universally enthusiasts for eugenics and forced euthanasia, and its opponents as heartless sadists, sacrificing ordinary human pity to ideological purity.

He supports the battle against equality in the civil sphere and claims the church should not have to function, in a civil society, in accordance with civil law.
Granting such communities freedom to define their own position does not negate the general legal freedoms of anyone; attempting to bind such communities by legal definition arguably does negate the liberties of the community to be what it says it is.
Listen, any time the church is not looking after the Least of These, there;s a problem. Doesn't he read The Book? (I trained in Lit Crit as an English major. It seems to me a lot of these Conservatives have never Read the Book.)

Yet he says next to nothing to rebuke the Anglican Church of Uganda for supporting criminalization of homosexuality.

Let's remember what the C of Uganda is doing...with only a faint peep from Rowan. Quoted by MadPriest:
The Church of Uganda, therefore, believes that “Homosexual practice is incompatible with Scripture” and we recommend that the following issues be taken into consideration:
....strengthens the existing Penal Code to protect the boy child, especially from homosexual exploitation; to prohibit lesbianism, bestiality, and other sexual perversions; and to prohibit procurement of material and promotion of homosexuality as normal or as an alternative lifestyle, be adopted.

So, I'm puzzled. A lesbian bishop, who is widely agreed to be extremely well qualified, is to be opposed. And the desire of the Ugandans to kill the gays is a mild tut tut?????


dr.primrose said...

The Diocese of Los Angeles update concerning the
current standing committee approvals for the bishops suffragan was released tonight. It says:

"Of a total majority of 56 standing committee consents needed in each election, 36 have been received for the Rev. Canon Mary Douglas Glasspool, and 48 for the Rev. Canon Diane Jardine Bruce."

This was the announcement last week:

"Of a total majority of 56 Standing Committee consents needed in each election, 29 have been received for the Rev. Canon Mary Douglas Glasspool, and 34 for the Rev. Canon Diane Jardine Bruce."

So Mary has gone up 7 votes while Diane has gone up 14 votes during the last week. I reserve comment at the moment.

IT said...

I hope they do the right hting
I'm not confident they will.

Erika Baker said...

And that whole silly Malaysia comment ignores the fact that the anti gay campaigned has been orchestrated and financed largely by American fundagelicals.

I so wish he could engage with the politics of this a little more deeply.

Ann said...

The myth that Malaysian Anglicans are under threat of death and can't evangelize because TEC has elected gay and lesbian bishops is like of those urban legends - totally unprovable and used to scare people into going against what they know is right. I have heard it over and over with various countries in Asia and Africa mentioned. No mention of the gay and lesbian Anglicans who are actually being killed - they are the ones who need our solidarity and witness. Watch Voices of Witness: Africa if you want to know more. They say continue to speak out and move ahead - you are our hope for a future.
All the Bishops and Deputies received a copy or order on online - watch it!

David said...

The ABC has lost all moral credibility with me long ago. So quite frankly, I don't give a flip what he says about these topics :P

Marshall Scott said...

Well, let's be clear about a couple of things. There certainly are GLBT persons who suffer abroad, and there were reports from American bishops at Lambeth that bishops from other parts of the Communion had told such stories.

Still, there are two things about that we don't know (even accepting the accuracy of the reports). The first is whether those abusers were going to find a victim whether or not they could point to "Western values." The second is whether our restraint (and for all that some would like it have lasted longer, we have shown restraint, when almost no other party involved has) has really helped anyone. Have GLBT persons suffered at the hands of someone blaming the awful Americans? Certainly it's conceivable. Has any potential victim ever reported that the abusers said, "Well, because the Americans have slowed down we'll let you go?" We haven't heard that story. I fear we never will.

NB: my verification is "hooke:" as in a well known story and a familiar villain.

Ann said...

Here is Matt Kennedy of Stand Firm's explanation of what happened - points for clarity:

Requests: Please Read The Resolution. Do exegesis; not isogesis. Please resist the temptation to read your wishes and desires into the text.

1. The motion does not "affirm" the ACNA.

2. The motion does not "affirm" that the ACNA is part of the Anglican Communion.

3. The motion "affirms" a "desire" . Translation: Ohhh, how sweet that you want to be my boyfriend. I "affirm" your desire.

4. The motion does not refer to the ACNA as a whole but to the desire of "those who formed" the ACNA.

5. The motion does not affirm the desire of "those who formed the ACNA" to remain in "the Anglican Communion", but rather, it affirms their desire to remain a part of the Anglican "family". Arguably, anyone who prays with a prayerbook and wears a robe of some kind could be considered a member of the "Anglican Family"

it's margaret said...

" ordain a partnered homosexual bishop is, simply as a matter of fact, something that has a devastating impact on the freedom of, say, the Malaysian Christian...."

....and, say, my friends who have been beaten and left for dead because they are gay are of no account? friends who have been shot and murdered in front of their lovers are of no account? gay friends who have lost their jobs and families are of no account?

Feh. Let's blame the gay bishop elect instead of condemning the perpetrators of gay-bashing violence... I hate that crap.

JCF said...

Rowan's blaming of +Gene and (+)Mary (and TEC for electing them bishops) for the persecution of Malaysian Christians is BENEATH CONTEMPT!

A more accurate "x, then y": Rowan fiddles, LGBT Ugandans burn...


I still have confidence that (+)Mary Glasspool will receive the necessary consents (but probably few extra).

NancyP said...

1. Re ABC: asshat
2. Re Uganda: Not only is the proposed law an abomination, but the concern for sexual exploitation of an unwilling "boy child", as opposed to the lack of concern for sexually exploited girl children, is typical of the patriarchal ideology of the bill's proponents.