Friday, February 17, 2006

More on the Decline of Theological Liberalism

The Washington Post reports that the Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire, Vickie Eugene Robinson, is being treated for alcoholism. You may recall that Robinson divorced his wife to live with a gay lover and instead of being disciplined was elevated to the office of bishop.

When asked if his sexual behavior required repentance, Robinson replied, "It is not something of which I should repent and I have no intention of doing so. I have been led to understand that I am loved by God just as I am. That is not to say I am perfect but it is my belief that my orientation is value-neutral. It is what I do with my relationship that God really cares about."

So his "orientation is value-neutral." It's only his "relationship" that is of concern to God. Robinson then gets to the crux of the matter, the abandonment of Scriptural authority. "We worship a living God," says Robinson, "not one locked up in the Scripture of 2,000 years ago." What does it say about a church that one of its bishops can make such a remark?

For more good stuff from Robinson, you can check out his interview with the butchers over at Planned Parenthood where he defends the "right to choose" and compares his trip out of the closet with the Exodus story.


Let's see, what did Paul say were the qualifications for an
overseer?

If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.


On the plus side, Robinson is apparently "well thought of by outsiders." He was greeted with hosannas at New York's gay pride parade last spring.

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Personally, while I find this man and the oh so public airing of his sexuality repulsive, I have nothing against homosexuals -- they are human beings with lives to live, and I treat them that way; I choose to make no strong moral judgement about their 'lifestyle'. If I believed 'hate crime' laws ought to exist (I don't), I'd agree they should be covered. But what annoys me today is how homosexuality is now so completely covered under the umbrella of political correctness that it is almost impossible to say something as simple and obvious as that it is abnormal -- aberrant. And what is demanded as 'tolerance' is really little less than acceptance of the whole 'gay rights' agenda, including marriage (I've never come across a good explanation of why we ought to alter the definition of marriage this way, other than to avoid being called names) and adoption, which is where I absolutely draw the line. I think the attempts to shame people who feel this way by calling them 'bigots' etc are also very harmful -- it creates a climate where reasonable public debate is no longer possible.

6:26 AM  
Blogger Fr. John said...

"Let the dead bury the dead."

That is the only response to someone who calls themself a 'gay bishop.'

8:54 AM  
Blogger Darrell said...

A wise word, Father John.

As to the first commenter, we will have to agree to disagree as to the propriety of making strong moral judgments about homosexuality.

The point about tolerance turning into tyranny is instructive, though. I think tolerance in our day and age is little more than an ideological construct employed by the propagators of a rising worldview to ultimately dislodge a competing, weakening worldview.

So here we have demands by secularists that adherents to a Christian law-order "tolerate" the views of competing worldviews. Of course, the goal of the humanists is ultimately to expunge the Christian order and replace it with a humanistic law-order.

Thus, in the past, blasphemy was punishable by civil magistrates. Today, the new blasphemy is condemnation of homosexuals, or other "oppressed" groups.

You are also correct that the secularists are not interested in a reasoned, rational debate, but seek the smashing of Christianity and the imperial claims of Jesus Christ.

11:45 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home