Like many of you, I marvel that there are more blessings of same-sex unions in London through the Church of England than in the entire U.S. Episcopal Church in the course of a year.
Like many of you, I am struck by the hypocrisy of the Archbishop who would tolerate us if would just be as sneaky and secretive about our approach to the LGBT Christians in our church as Rowan has been in the Church of England.
Like many of you, I suspect there are more gay bishops in the Church of England than there are in the U.S.
Like many of you, I am truly outraged about the Archbishop's language of "choice" and "lifestyle." This once-promising Archbishop seems to have retreated into the 19th century. For the life of me, I don't understand it.
I am tempted to open a can of worms by asking what kind of "lifestyle" the Archbishop of Canterbury models when he lives in a bleepin' palace! Surely that is a "lifestyle choice" of which he might need to repent. My bishop lives in a modest house and drives his own Prius. I know of bishops in the U.S. who drive Rolls-Royce cars. What kind of "lifestyle" does Rowan Williams exhibit?
Like many of you, I am frustrated by Archbishop Rowan Williams' claim that we have not done the theological work to “justify” same-sex marriages/unions.
Yes, I am angry about all that.
But here's my question.
I’m just a simple Episcopalian who lacks seminary education or theological training. So here’s my simple question to the Archbishop of Canterbury and those who oppose the recent actions of the Episcopal Church in the U.S. and the Diocese of Niagara in Canada: Would you kindly point me to the theological justification and explanation of heterosexual marriage? What are our priests doing when they preside at a heterosexual marriage? Please give me citations – not ad hominem claims – and not that pablum of “what has been believed everywhere by all Christians,” because that dog won’t hunt.
Please tell me where the Anglican Communion has set out its theological understanding of heterosexual marriage, what it means for our priests to officiate as agents of the state, and what it means for our clergy to bless a heterosexual marriage.
Surely such explanations have been published. Once we know what they are, we can frame our discussions about same-sex marriage on them.
I have hunch that our Anglican churches have not done the necessary theological work to articulate or justify our priests' work in presiding over the blessing of any marriage -- gay or straight!
Of course I could be wrong.
But my expectation is that no "justification" of heterosexual marriage has ever been promulgated. I have a hunch it was just assumed as a "given" and "normative." Correct me if I am wrong.