• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Episcopal Diocese Rejects Gay Priest

retrorich

SUPER NOT-A-MOD
N.J. Episcopal Diocese Chooses Mass. Priest As New Bishop Over Openly Gay Candidate In this photo released by the Episcopal Diocese of California the Rev. Michael Barlowe, a candidate to become the bishop of the Episcopal diocese of Newark, N.J. is seen on May 3, 2006. Barlowe, an openly gay Episcopal priest, is among six candidates for bishop of Newark at a time when divisions over the Bible and sexuality are threatening the denomination and the worldwide Anglican family. (AP Photo/Episcopal Diocese of California)09-23-2006 2:11 PM
By CHRIS NEWMARKER, Associated Press Writer
NEWARK, N.J. -- Avoiding further controversy in the worldwide Anglican family, the Episcopal Diocese of Newark on Saturday chose a Massachusetts priest as their new bishop, rather than an openly gay candidate on the ballot.
The Rev. Mark Beckwith won on the third ballot, taking 253, or about 53 percent of the 477 ballots cast by clergy and lay representatives.
Canon Michael Barlowe, 51, an openly gay priest from California, only had one vote from a lay person in the final round. Even in the first round, he only had 40 votes, 16 from clergy and 24 from lay people.
The Rev. Elizabeth Kaeton, an openly gay priest at St. Paul's Church in Chatham, felt Beckwith was the best choice to lead the diocese, but thought the global Anglican community's pressure on the American church to avoid more gay bishops was an "elephant in the room."
She thought it sad that "someone of the caliber of Michael Barlowe had such a poor showing."
Barlowe is currently an officer for congregational development for the Diocese of California in San Francisco.
The election in the historically liberal diocese came at a time when divisions over the Bible and sexuality are threatening the denomination and the worldwide Anglican family.
A win by Barlowe would put the diocese at the center of a crisis over whether Anglicans who disagree about ordaining gays can stay in the same fellowship.
The feud erupted in the Anglican community in 2003, after the Episcopal Church consecrated its first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.
In June, the Episcopal General Convention, the church's top policy-making body, voted to ask U.S. bishops to "exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration" of candidates "whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church." However, the measure is not binding.
Beckwith, of Worcester, Mass., had previously served in the Newark diocese in Morristown and Hackensack. He must still be approved nationally by diocesan standing committees, which are panels of local lay people and clergy similar to a board of directors, and a majority of the more than 100 Episcopal bishops who lead U.S. dioceses.
If approved, Beckwith will replace Bishop John Palmer Croneberger, who is resigning to spend more time with his ill wife, diocese spokeswoman Rev. Sandye Wilson said.
The Episcopal Church is the U.S. representative of the global Anglican Communion.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
I am completely pro gay....anyone that knows me on this forum knows that fact.

Yet, I cannot understand for the life of me how being gay and being a priest/pastor/clergyman in a Christian church will ever work. Much of modern Christian doctrine would have to be rewritten and changed. Am I being really naive here or what?
 

retrorich

SUPER NOT-A-MOD
Buttercup said:
I am completely pro gay....anyone that knows me on this forum knows that fact.

Yet, I cannot understand for the life of me how being gay and being a priest/pastor/clergyman in a Christian church will ever work. Much of modern Christian doctrine would have to be rewritten and changed. Am I being really naive here or what?
I would say that it is indeed time for much of Christian doctrine to be rewritten and changed. And the sooner, the better. The way things currently stand on the gay issue makes me prouder than ever to be an atheist.
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
Isn't it possible that the other guy was simply the better candidate?

Sure, there's a good possibility that this bloke wasn't picked because he's gay, and if he was the better candidate that would be a terrible injustice.
However, i'm very much against so-called "positive discrimination", so choosing the gay candidate over the straight one just because he was gay would have been just as much of an injustice, in my opinion.
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
retrorich said:
I would say that it is indeed time for much of Christian doctrine to be rewritten and changed. And the sooner, the better. The way things currently stand on the gay issue makes me prouder than ever to be an atheist.
I can't see this happening anytime soon. I think it's quite possible that gay marriage will be allowed in the not too distant future because that issue can fall under civil jurisdiction or can be appealed to under a human rights platform.

But, I can't imagine in my lifetime seeing most of the Christian population on the globe believing that being gay and being a pastor is ok. That means that the sin of fornication would be condoned, and that the whole notion of a man marrying a woman would be obsolete. Those are two huge issues to overcome.
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Buttercup said:
I am completely pro gay....anyone that knows me on this forum knows that fact.

Yet, I cannot understand for the life of me how being gay and being a priest/pastor/clergyman in a Christian church will ever work. Much of modern Christian doctrine would have to be rewritten and changed. Am I being really naive here or what?

If is it not too personal are you still classiftying your self as a christian at this time. I noticed you are subbing reincarnation for eternal bliss at this time. Also John S. Spong has some great ideas on reforming Christianty. He is likely centuries ahead of his time though.
http://www.dioceseofnewark.org/jsspong/reform.html
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
robtex said:
If is it not too personal are you still classiftying your self as a christian at this time. I noticed you are subbing reincarnation for eternal bliss at this time. Also John S. Spong has some great ideas on reforming Christianty. He is likely centuries ahead of his time though.
http://www.dioceseofnewark.org/jsspong/reform.html
I'm not anything at this time. :p I was a Christian for years and years but am now strongly questioning the existence of God or if we could really know what God wants if there is a God. To know what God wants means you have to take the word of men you've never known. Guess you missed my long thread about that subject.

Thanks for the link, Rob.
 
Top