[OPEN] Heterosexual Elected Bishop of California

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fish and Bread

Dona nobis pacem
Jan 31, 2005
14,109
2,389
✟68,185.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The following are excerpts from http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1931996
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The Episcopal Diocese of California on Saturday avoided widening a rift over gays in the global Anglican Communion by electing a heterosexual man as its next bishop.

[...]"Your vote today remains a vote for inclusion and communion — of gay and lesbian people in their full lives as single or partnered people, of women, of all ethnic minorities, and all people," Andrus said by telephone over the cathedral's public address system to members after being told of his election. "My commitment to Jesus Christ's own mission of inclusion is resolute."


Rev. Andrus of Alabama was elected with 72 percent of the clergy vote and 55 percent of the lay vote. The Rev. Canon Eugene Sutton of Washington, D.C., who is also heterosexual, came in second, with 13 percent of the clergy vote and 33 percent of the lay vote.

It seems the mood in California is one of reconciliation, and that's one of the more liberal dioceses in the country. My guess at this point is that the Episcopal Church remains more or less intact this summer. Things might have been different had the convention had to vote on another homosexual bishop, but now I think we'll continue be one big argumentative family for a while yet -- divorce has likely been averted for the time being. :)
 

Torah613

Frum in the Chood yo!
Dec 29, 2005
4,257
1,477
Kansas
✟18,638.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I've always said, regardless of the sexual preferences of the man or woman selected--I simply hope and pray that the best person for the job is selected. I believe they have done as they think is best. May the Holy Spirit inspire and guide the Bishop-elect in the days ahead.

Joe Zollars
 
Upvote 0

DeoJuvante

Senior Member
Mar 8, 2006
601
55
Australia
✟16,027.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
AU-Greens
Yes. Choosing a person of type A as bishop is a strong political statement, even though most people by far are of type A. Of course! It seems so logical now. :scratch:

PS,
Am I the only one who finds the smileys at Christian Forums all too... cutesy? What I really wanted above was rolling eyes but, oh well.
 
Upvote 0

Fish and Bread

Dona nobis pacem
Jan 31, 2005
14,109
2,389
✟68,185.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
SaepiusOfficio said:
Yes. Choosing a person of type A as bishop is a strong political statement, even though most people by far are of type A. Of course! It seems so logical now. :scratch:

I hope that Californians chose the best person for the job. I would have supported their decision had they chosen to elect a gay or lesbian person, as I did the New Hampshirians in the election of Bishop Robinson. However, I am happy that it worked out that the diocese of California came to the conclusion that a person who happened to be heterosexual was best for the job, simply because that happy coincidence will keep us all in communion with each other longer. I wouldn't favor discrimination against homosexuals to achieve that end, though, and I don't think there was any discrimination here. I just wanted to clarify that, since I know my opining that it was a step that will lead to reconciliation might be misleading as to my actual opinion in the broader scheme of things.
 
Upvote 0

chalice_thunder

Senior Veteran
Jan 13, 2004
4,840
418
64
Seattle
Visit site
✟7,202.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Fish and Bread said:
I hope that Californians chose the best person for the job. I would have supported their decision had they chosen to elect a gay or lesbian person, as I did the New Hampshirians in the election of Bishop Robinson. However, I am happy that it worked out that the diocese of California came to the conclusion that a person who happened to be heterosexual was best for the job, simply because that happy coincidence will keep us all in communion with each other longer. I wouldn't favor discrimination against homosexuals to achieve that end, though, and I don't think there was any discrimination here. I just wanted to clarify that, since I know my opining that it was a step that will lead to reconciliation might be misleading as to my actual opinion in the broader scheme of things.

I have a lot of friends in that diocese...some of them electors. It really does seem like they were trying to continue the path and impetus that Bill Swing brought to the diocese, and Mark Andrus appears to be the one who they fits that. (It probably doesn't hurt the diocesan pocketbook since they now do not need to do a consecration!;) )

I do think it is a pity that this is the issue over which the Anglican Communion is so divided; especially when there is SO MUCH that unites us all.
 
Upvote 0

TomUK

What would Costanza do?
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2004
9,095
397
40
Lancashire, UK
✟62,145.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
chalice_thunder said:
I do think it is a pity that this is the issue over which the Anglican Communion is so divided; especially when there is SO MUCH that unites us all.

It is a pity, which is why i am so thankful that the ECUSA is now beginning to take steps towards reconciliation. :clap:
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.