Married But Celibate...?
Once again the Anglican/Episcopal church (of which I am a member) has come up with a "middle of the road" position in an attempt to make both sides happy -- and ends up with a ludicrous position that just annoys both sides. The Sunday Times of Britain tells the story: Church to let gay clergy 'marry' but they must stay celibate.
posted by Darrell Grizzle | 3:10 PM
6 Comments:
OMG! Let's let gluttons buy food but not eat, or let's let gamblers own casinos but never gamble, or maybe we could let priests pray for others but not for themselves!
Julie
...so very, very ridiculous.
At first I thought this was a reference to an article in "The Onion". OOPS!
What a bunch of ecclesiastical idiots; hair-splitting Christian pharisees who will only succeed in making the Church a laughingstock in the eyes of the world. And the Archbishop of Canterbury is such a wuss; it saddens me to see a man so intelligent without the backbone to implement a courageous and prophetic stance that is both realistic and spiritually viable. Unfortunately, most of the Anglican leadership is too interested in trying to "make nice" and keep all sides happy, while in the process, they alienate everyone. I can't stand the conservative, theological Neanderthals, but at least they are consistent. Why is it that the liberal leadership in the Church has lost its backbone to say, like Martin Luther, "Here I sand. I can do no other!" The result of such half-assed fence-walking is the likes of these kind of ludicrous "celibate unions."
Hey, thanks for visiting my blog and for the great link!
"Married but celibate" is so ridiculous. Makes me glad I'm a UU with Quaker leanings. ;-)
But the Episcopal Church has many beautiful aspects and a gorgeous liturgy. I'm sure SOME day they'll get this right!
mmm where does that leave my non-married and non-celibate God, who loves generously and indiscriminately and who bestows ecstacy on whomever, in manifold ways. . should God stop loving too because when all is said and done it's not nice to love everyone including .. yes everyone . . .or is it?
Post a Comment
<< Home