Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Anglican Church At Crossroads Over Gay Bishop

January 16, 2007
Anglican Church At Crossroads Over Gay Bishop
By Rogan M. Smith

The Anglican Church is still at a "crossroads" and could split as the bitter debate rages on about how to resolve the issue of ordaining homosexual clergy, according to Archbishop Drexel Gomez.

Anglican Archbishop Drexel Gomez speaks with reporters on Monday.On Monday, Archbishop Gomez said the consecration of a practicing homosexual in the United States three years ago is still threatening to tear the church apart.

He was speaking during a press conference at the Anglican Diocese in Nassau.

Anglican leaders from around the globe are in the capital this week to try and heal the rifts caused by the appointment of gay bishop, Gene Robinson.

Mr. Robinson’s appointment as bishop of New Hampshire brought an angry reaction from conservatives and religious leaders in the US and all over the world who warned that the church could split.

Archbishop Gomez was appointed late last year by the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams to head an Anglican Covenant to examine the fallout in the Anglican Communion.

The archbishop said the Covenant Design Group (CDG) will examine ways in which the member churches in the Anglican Communion could meet as member churches of the worldwide communion and agree to be committed and accountable to one other.

"This is a pivotal moment for the Anglican Communion and that’s why the Archbishop has appointed this group because we cannot continue to drift along as we have been doing, and we’ve had one crisis over homosexuality," he said.

"There is a possibility that we could be faced with another crisis shortly in the communion that will emanate from a group in Australia. There’s a group there that is talking about having lay people presiding at the Eucharist. That’s becoming an issue that’s being talked about more and more and if it does it will present the communion with a serious theological and pastoral issue. Our problem in the communion today is we have no existing mechanism for automatically dealing with these issues."

Archbishop Gomez said the decision to consecrate a gay bishop has brought with it dire consequences.

"We have already lost some members in the United States. I think we have lost some in England, but the greatest threat is North America and Canada unquestionably," he said.

"Our hope is that we can avoid a split, because even if we end up with two kinds of subgroups the question is how do they relate to one another?"

Archbishop Gomez said many leaders have suggested that the Anglican Church devise a model that would allow the church to make accommodations for subgroups, however it has not been explored as yet.

The Archbishop said his position is very clear about where he stands on the homosexuality issue.

"My position is that God, in his wisdom, determined that the human race is made up of male and female persons and that they complement each other. The teaching of the Bible is the coming together of man and woman [and that] constitutes marriage in the biblical pattern. Any other provision will be contrary to the biblical tradition," he said.

The Anglican Church has traditionally tolerated a wide spectrum of beliefs, and its communion includes about 80 million people worldwide.

Archbishop Gomez said theologians continue to press for the church to accept marriage between homosexuals. They want the church to change its biblical premise that only a man and woman can be married. Instead they want the church to accept that any two people who love one another may marry.

"I couldn’t accept that because it is contrary to the teaching of scripture. What is interesting is that no one disputes that in every instance in the Bible in which sexuality is mentioned, homosexual practice is always a negative. It’s never commended in the Bible and even those who are trying to change the anthropology have to admit that the text does not support it. So, they find ways of reinterpreting the text," he said.

"Scholars will always find some linguistic way of getting behind the text to make it imply something else."

No comments: