If it weren't near ludicrous, I would almost welcome this development because then, maybe, the gay Anglican bishops can set an example for all the gay Christians in the world, that, as the Catholic Church has always taught, it's not homosexuality per se that she opposes but the active practice of it.
Yet liberals have sneered at the Church's line advocating chastity for Christian homosexuals, as much as they sneer at her teaching that abstinence in any environment that breeds HIV can be a far more effective way of fending off the virus than the cheap condoms handed out to the poor in Africa and Asia (which can and do break and are therefore far from failsafe against AIDS).
How, these narcissistic Western liberals ask, can anyone possibly expect human beings to be chaste? If anyone can, it's the Church, which - despite those despicable priests and religious who have offended God and man by making their own sexual gratification their highest priority (they are, of course, only reflecting anything-goes hedonism of post-1968 Western society)-- can point to two millennia of nuns, priests, religious and countless saintly and sainted laymen and women who have led chaste and joyous lives in service to God!
Anyway, consider this development, to which my first reaction was ROTF-LOL..
Church of England will now allow
gay men to become bishops -
provided they remain chaste
LONDON, Jan 4, 2013 (CNA/EWTN News) - The Church of England has decided to permit gay male clergy in civil partnerships to become bishops, provided that they promise to be celibate.
“The House (of Bishops) believed it would be unjust to exclude from consideration for the episcopate anyone seeking to live fully in conformity with the Church's teaching on sexual ethics or other areas of personal life and discipline,” Graham James, Anglican bishop of Norwich, stated Jan. 4.
“All candidates for the episcopate undergo a searching examination of personal and family circumstances, given the level of public scrutiny associated with being a bishop in the Church of England.”
The decision was published Dec. 20, and was made by the Church of England's House of Bishops earlier that month.
Civil partnerships were introduced in the United Kingdom in 2005, at which time those in civil partnerships were allowed to become priests of the Church of England so long as they promised celibacy.
The Church of England holds that clergy “cannot claim the liberty to enter into sexually active homophile relationships,” according to a 1991 document “Issues in Human Sexuality.”
The Church of England teaches that “sexual intercourse...properly belongs within marriage exclusively” and that marriage is “between a man and a woman,” according to its 2005 statement on civil partnerships.
[But does the CofE enforce - or even simply espouse - this teaching at all with its faithful? In ueber-secular UK, are you kidding me? Yet it would now purport to enforce it among its clergy and bishops. Very confusing! Heterosexual Anglican clergy can marry and live married lives like their faithful, but homosexuals must be chaste because the Church says so. Why doesn't it say so for the lay faithful as well?]
The Church of England's new policy is the result of controversy surrounding Jeffery John, a priest of the church who is gay.
In 2003 he was appointed bishop of Reading, but was forced to withdraw. Then in 2010 he was nominated for bishop of Southwark but was rejected because of his sexual orientation. He has been in a civil partnership since 2006, and maintains that his relationship is celibateThe move has drawn criticism from both Anglo-Catholic and evangelical factions within the Church of England, who in November successfully opposed plans to allow women bishops in the church.
Rod Thomas is chairman of the evangelical group Reform, and told the BBC that the decision is a grave one and will further split the Anglican Communion.
“It would be much more divisive than what we have seen over women bishops. If you thought that was a furore, wait to see what will happen the first time a bishop in a civil partnership is appointed.”
Gay advocates within in the Church of England greeted the announcement with mixed reviews. Colin Coward, a Church of England priest and director of the group, Changing Attitude, stated that the celibacy requirement was a poor one.
“Jesus, the Holy Spirit, advocates deeply loving faithful committed relationships in which people express their love sexually, and that is Biblical teaching,” he said, according to the BBC.
[See what happens when the devil quotes Jesus himself to try and justify conduct that was once universally considered an 'abomination' Apparently, Coward never heard of Sodom and Gomorrah and why God visited such a terrible punishment on their sins!
Sorry to sound so priggish! This is not an abstract subject for me. Working in multimedia, my best friends and most valuable co-workers were and are gay who stopped being observant Catholics because they did make a conscious lifestyle choice. I wish I could say it brought them joy, but the two or three who thought there was a monogamous future in a gay relationship were pretty quickly disillusioned, and most of them ended up settling for casual sex when and where they can get it.
One of them decided in his 40s that he wanted to raise a child, so he adopted an abandoned baby and raised him with the help of an older sister. He turned out to be the happiest and most settled among all our homophile friends. One tried to join the Trappist order, but the vocations master convinced him after a few weeks in the monastery that he didn't pass their psychological muster. And I think, with age, the others have since realized that self-gratification need not be sexual, especially if they are gifted with enviable creative talents through which they could channel their energies.
As for the Anglican priests and bishops who say they have succeeded to remain chaste in same-sex unions, I hope they share their experience and lessons with others who can use their example just to show that it can be done - and how it can be done. What a great pastoral service that would be.]
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 08/01/2013 15:25]