Anglican Leaders Censure Episcopal Church For Stance On Homosexuality

Jan 17, 2016

Photo credit: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images

By Camila Domonoske

The Episcopal Church has been disciplined by the Anglican Communion, the international faith fellowship of which the church is a part, over deep disagreements about homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

The church has not been removed from the communion. However, it will be barred from Anglican decision-making for three years and will no longer represent the community in ecumenical or interfaith bodies, the Anglican organization has decided.

The Episcopal Church consecrated its first openly gay bishop in 2003. In 2012, the church voted to allow blessings over same-sex unions, while not calling them identical to marriage. Then last year, the church’s highest body voted to formally approve Episcopalian same-sex marriages.

More-conservative churches within the international Anglican community disagree with those decisions.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

13 comments on “Anglican Leaders Censure Episcopal Church For Stance On Homosexuality

  • Of course, this is no surprise. Then why don’t gays stop supporting the church and religion which historically and presently hates their guts. Also, religion, the church, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Koran etc., etc., was and are a con, a lie, a fraud etc. We have the information why they are mostly frauds (information from history, linguistics, archeology, Biblical scholars, research etc.) i.e.: Jesus never lived historically that the Bible and religion is a creation of the human imagination. Go to uTube for more information on this: Dawkins, Hitchens, Krauss, Dennett, Harris and many, many others. Religion is dangerous as it shuts down the mind. DUH…

    Report abuse

  • There is more information on the BBC link:-
    The Church leaders added that the majority of those gathered at the meeting – which was described as “really tough” – would “reaffirm” the teaching of scripture that “upholds marriage as between a man and a woman”.

    Those who sent the open letter to the primates ahead of the meeting have expressed “deep hurt” at the result.

    There was an atmosphere of significant mistrust at this meeting, perhaps hardly surprising given the animosity of the past years between the most traditionalist of the provinces and the most liberal.

    The disagreement over Anglican doctrine regarding same sex marriage is probably a more fundamental one than the divisions that raged over female priests.

    But the subtext of the meeting has been the power struggle just beneath the surface over who should lead the Anglican communion in the future – the countries of the global south, where congregations are growing, represented in part by Global Anglican Future (GAFCON) or Canterbury, its traditional leadership based in an increasingly secular global north where congregations have been in decline for many years.

    The careful wording of the resolution agreed by the majority of primates ensured there was no mention of the words “sanction” or “punishment”, although the strength of feeling about the Episcopal Church’s unilateral action was abundantly clear.

    The Global Anglican Future Conference (Gafcon), which represents conservative Anglican leaders worldwide, had sought sanctions against the US Episcopal Church, and some members said they would walk out of this week’s meeting unless a penalty was applied.

    Episcopal Presiding Bishop Michael Curry told the other leaders their vote would bring “real pain” to gays and lesbians and to Episcopalians “committed to following Jesus in the way of love and being a church that lives that love”.

    Other gay Christians and supporters of equal marriage said there was “no acknowledgement of the deep pain the Anglican Communion’s decisions will cause, nor any concern for the pastoral care of LGBTI Christians.”

    Labour MP and former Anglican minister Chris Bryant, who is gay, said: “I’ve finally given up on Anglican church today after its love-empty decision on sexuality.

    This should help people see just how backward and bigoted organised religion is, so hopefully more will simply dump religion and opt for civil marriage.

    Report abuse

  • American fundamentalists from C street lobbied African churches to kill gays. They succeeded. Now they are bullying Canadian and American churches to follow suit. A schism would be a good thing. It would reduce the flow of money from North American churches to African ones. This is so strange because the original anti gay notions came from British colonisers.

    Report abuse

  • You cannot say with any certainty that THE Jesus never lived because there are no records to confirm or deny the claim that he did. If you try, it would be an act of blind ‘faith’ on your part to say that he did not exist, just as it is an act of blind faith from Christians and Muslims that he did exist.

    Report abuse

  • “Go to uTube” sounds so similar to the deniers cry of “Do the research.”
    It just says you got nothing, so you put the onus on others to prove/disprove your point.
    Ignorance is just as dangerous as religion.

    Report abuse

  • harryf200
    Jan 17, 2016 at 4:08 pm

    You cannot say with any certainty that THE Jesus never lived

    The onus of proof is on those making positive assertions. You cannot prove that thousands of spirit gods worshipped by various tribes never existed. That adds nothing to the credibility of such claims.

    because there are no records to confirm or deny the claim that he did.

    The absence of independent Roman records of claimed spectacular Biblical events should raise suspicions, as should the absence of any biblical records written within decades or centuries of claimed events.
    What biblical “gospels” there are, as have been passed down in folk-law, conflict with each other, and were certainly not written by the authors to which they are attributed.

    Gospel of Mary -
    Gospel of Thomas
    Gospel of Truth
    Gospel of Philip
    Gospel of Judas

    If you try, it would be an act of blind ‘faith’ on your part to say that he did not exist,

    What we can say, is that there is no eyewitness testimony that such a person existed, although the name was common, and the whole area was over-run with itinerant preachers.

    just as it is an act of blind faith from Christians and Muslims that he did exist.

    That is a false equivalence. Belief without evidence is blind faith. Scepticism in the absence of evidence, or for claims which fly in the face of the evidence, is not.

    Were there preachers with followers around that area at that time? – Yes! – Hundreds of them!

    Could some of them have been called Joseph / Yeshua / etc.? – Yes!

    Did they go around performing miracles and attracting huge gatherings described in the NT’s 4 gospels selected by the Roman Bishop Athenasius of Alexandria in the 4th century? – Probably not! – We would expect the meticulous records kept by the earlier Romans to say something about these notable events, if they were happening!

    Report abuse

  • This is really great, they’re caught by what’s written in their old made up book. Now they don’t have a way out, unless they admit the book is wrong.
    Now all the in fighting will start. I wonder how many Anglican clergy are gay? I look forward to seeing this particular house of cards collapse.
    In the end the issue of having to modify the book, or the interpretation of it, may cause the end of all the major religions. I notice the RCC has been trying to agree with general scientific understanding and theories, like evolution, but it must mean lots of backtracking and a loss of credibility in the end.
    Though if the followers are stupid enough they’ll probably spin it out for a while yet.

    Report abuse

  • Actually we can.
    1) Logically, the Jesus of the bible was a singular being, thus of the many different versions of the Jesus myth, we can say with certainty that at least (n-1) of them are wrong.
    2) Saying you can’t prove ‘the Jesus’ didn’t exist (as opposed to men called Jesus) is tantamount to saying you can’t prove invisible pink unicorns don’t exist, and/or didn’t exist 2000 years ago. While true, it is a nonsense argument.
    3) Basic literary analysis demonstrates that Jesus being a fictional character is more likely than his being a real person. (Or at best, a fictional character based on a real person(s) – in the sense of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Slayer!) He can do magic. He can come back form the dead. His actions make no sense based upon the goals that are usually assigned to him. His personal life is a very close match for other fables. He demonstrates no knowledge beyond that which is present in the cultures the authors would have lived in.

    Absolute certainty is of course elusive. It’s possible that a particularly stupid super powerful being tried to preach inane common knowledge about forgiveness, while failing to impart any useful and innovative technical, medical, or ethical knowledge, and at the same time spurning the most comprehensive information distribution system in the world (the Roman Empire) but it’s unlikely. So unlikely that we can say with some degree of confidence that the supernatural Jesus (whatever version you wish) did not exist.

    Report abuse

  • It’s great to see this kind of infighting between the Christians. Perhaps there will be yet another odd 30,000 new Protestant sects arise as a result of this power struggle ?

    And all because of their attitudes towards other peoples’ sexual inclinations. What the hell’s it got to do with them ? Absolutely nothing ! But then Jesus is always watching you, – especially when you’re in bed !

    Report abuse

  • 10
    Pinball1970 says:

    Then why don’t gays stop supporting the church and religion which historically and presently hates their guts.

    Yes I agree and I never quite understood that position from members of the gay community who class themselves as Christian.

    Scripture is clear on homosexuality so why a homosexual would want to become or stay part of the club is beyond me.

    Jesus did not saying against homosexuality but he did not say much about women or slavery either, he did not condemn those verses that degrade women or homosexuals.

    Scholars agree that jesus probably existed as a historical figure.

    Whoever he was he was just another deluded jewish preacher who was convinced the apocalypse was close at hand.

    Report abuse

  • The obscenity of the Bible and organized religion is demonstrated no more evident than on the recent Dawkins quote of what is going on in Alabama with TB, a state which eschews science and vaccinations, so it goes with the ignorant, the uneducated, the superstitious, and of course it is in the South’s “Bible Belt”

    Report abuse

  • The arrival of this news, on top of the recent report that Church of England attendance has dropped below 2% of the overall population must mean that the Anglican Communion has ceased to be a meaningful demographic for politicians – their personal, faith-based, convictions aside.

    The supportive positions taken up by some British politicians (my namesake included – see link page 6 and see his voting record on education) is becoming dangerous and dogmatic in the face of real world facts.

    Unfortunately, we’re still not getting our big majority (well over 60% of Britons) to vote against the nonsense – to ditch free parliamentary places for C of E bishops, and to disenfranchise the forces of sectarianism.

    Peace – it’s getting harder to defend.

    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.