I saw a political cartoon yesterday in the Rocky that pissed me off.
At first, it was sort of an eye-rolling whatever reaction I had. But as I thought more about it during the day, it just … well, pissed me off.
The cartoon showed folks in clerical vestments before an altar. The main priest is marked, “Episcopal Church,” and he is holding a host over his head, as during the communion service, that reads, “Anything goes.”
Okay, so we’ll leave aside using an image from a sacred ceremony for political cheap shots. But, “Anything goes”?
Anything goes?
There seems to be a sense among some folks that the decision by the General Convention to confirm the election of Rev. Gene Robinson as the next bishop of New Hampshire was some sort of license to … well, license. Like a bunch of kids hanging around the dorm, hitting a bong, and going, “Whoa, dude, we oughta, like, let gay folks get to be bishops, dude.” “Whoa, dude, that would be so radical. It would really freak the straights.” “Dude, you got that right. And then we can have all the hot chicks take their clothes off.” “Dude!”
I watched the debate on same sex unions at the 2000 General Convention here in Denver. And I’ve talked to folks who were there in Minneapolis this year. And that was not what was going on.
First off, Robinson was elected by New Hampshire, his home diocese. They knew his life, his background, his decisions. It is a strength — though, occasionally, a matter of contention — that the Episcopal Church allows individual dioceses to elect their bishops. Even, it’s worth noting, bishops who do not agree with national church policies. Bishops have been elected since the 70s-era decision to allow the ordination of women who are clear that they disagree with that policy, and, in fact, refuse to allow it in their dioceses. The national church does not demand that as a litmus test against which all candidates must pass; the role of the General Convention confirmation is to confirm that the election was performed in accordance with canon law.
Second, but given that, the confirmation of Robinson was the forcing of an issue that has bedeviled the Episcopal Church for decades. We’ve dillied and dithered over the idea of same-sex unions, recognizing that there is not an overall consensus on the subject. It’s worth noting that even this year, a resolution that would have authorized the development of liturgy for such unions, to be reviewed and decided upon at the next GC in three years, was amended to remove that liturgical development. That backing away from the subject was a lot less reported.
But with the Robinson election, the GC really had to fish or cut bait. They couldn’t delay or postpone or send the matter back for more study. Canonically, they had to vote him up or down. And, canonically, their legitimate role in doing so was quite limited.
They decided to fish. More power to them.
We can argue the theology all day if you want. I think that, theologically, there is far less to condemn Gene Robinson for in his sexual orientation than in, say, his divorce — and since we (Episcopalians, at least) no longer consider divorce the equivalent of adultery, nor force our women to stay silent in our churches, nor require them to keep their heads covered, nor forbid sex during menstruation, nor any other number of Pauline and Levitican injunctions, I think it’s more important to consider his behavior (and ours) in light of Jesus’ great commandments — does it promote, or hinder, love of God and love of neighbor? — and in the light of not just Scripture, but, as Anglican theology suggests, our reason, and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
The GC hardly decided that “anything goes.” To argue so trivializes the prayerful consideration, and long, heartfelt debate (on all side) over this issue. It trivializes the issue of diocesan independence and democracy. And it creates a false dichotomy between rigid, unyielding order, and utter, depraved chaos.
Confirming Gene Robinson was no more than a step along the road, both a small slice of the GC’s business for a week, and a small side show to the church’s mission. That it should get so much attention from press says more about the press (and its readership) than about the Episcopal Church. And that some folks consider it licentiousness says more about them than about Gene Robinson.