Does anyone know what is going on here?
Only hours before what was expected to be a historic vote on whether to approve the first openly gay Anglican bishop, Episcopal Church officials suddenly delayed the decision this afternoon, saying they needed to investigate sexual accusations against him.
Episcopalians at a convention that already has been punctuated by fierce debate over the selection of the gay bishop-elect, V. Gene Robinson, and fears that it could fracture the denomination, seemed further divided by the development on the day that the debate was finally to be over. In the hallways of the Episcopal Church USA meeting, some said any accusations needed to be thoroughly studied, while others denounced them as a desperate, last-minute move to block the appointment.
Is this just a smear? Is anyone from the area and know anything about the man? You had to be politically blind not to see something like this coming- any time you make your sexuality the cornerstone of your existence (although it may be his political opponents who have made it the cornerstone), it is going to lead to bad things. I don’t mean to say that gay people should be quiet and just hide who they are, but does anyone here think I would know who Gene Robinson was UNLESS he was gay? Maybe I am out in left field here…
James Joyner
I’m guessing that the charges are indeed a smear, given their 11th hour appearance.
And, no, were it not for his homosexuality, he’d be just another anonymous Episcopalian bishop.
Russ
Smear or not? Could be either.
I actually think there may be some legitimacy to the charges – the accuser hasn’t exactly tried to be anonymous. I suspect he was waiting to see what the bishops were going to do. If they were going to reject Robinson, there would be no need to make the charge.
Try a thought experiment: if it were a **Catholic** priest being accused, how much skepticism would there be?
Mason
I just caught on the news that the person making the accusations of “inappropriate contact” intended for his email to the bishops to be private. It was leaked to the press.
Sounds like a smear job to me.. or at the very least, a homophobe getting uppity about a slap on the back or something. Guess we’ll see.
tom scott
Just a question. Would this “victim” of a sexual nature have any less right to anonymity than Kobe Bryants accuser?
JKC
Smear or not? That’s what investigations are for. The timing sure is funny, though.
Gene Robinson’s sexuality is an issue only because a few troglodytes in the Episcopal Church have chosen to make it an issue. Christians of all denominations might want to reflect on how often Jesus himself railed against homosexuals. (Hint: the answer is zero.)
Adrianne Truett
Homophobe? The person emailing allegations of sexual misconduct supports the vote (going on at the same time) to allow same-sex union services. Smear? The writer’s a well-known journalist in his area and has quite a bit to lose from making things up. Last minute? As even Michael Howard, president of Integrity (the Episcopal Church’s pro-homosexual organization) says, the timing should not make people suspicious, as victims of sexual harrassment often come forward only at the last moment, when they feel that all hope has been lost for something else stopping whatever is going on.
I hear from friends participating in the convention that, while the charges have not been called baseless, they have been deemed not of sufficient import to warrant further investigation. Apparently, it was said that straight men “should expect and tolerate” what the accuser believed to be inappropriate touching from homosexual men. That’s just the way they are. Additionally, as one report says, since the accuser was not in a subordinate position, and no “differences in the balance of power” existed between the two men, there could not have been sexual harrassment. That only occurs where there is a power imbalance, apparently. (Ok, boys: get it on with your equals, and, whether they agree or not, it’s fine!)
Adrianne Truett
And, JKC: he didn’t rail against much of anything except hypocrites, heretics, and power-grabbers. But, he did say, after forgiving the woman caught in sexual sin, “go, and sin no more.” Didn’t say, “now you must be stoned;” also didn’t say, “well, we’ll accept you no matter what you do.”
Emperor Misha I
Look, I don’t know where the accusations came from or why and I have NO problem with homosexuals, but a gay BISHOP?
What’s next? A Moslem one?
This is just plain old ridiculous, but they ARE Anglicans, after all. Not much adherence to scripture there.
JKC
So glad Misha is around to critique my church. As a Christian, I will try to avoid the temptation to call him a dolt.
So Misha, is your church 100% Scripturally Pure(TM)? Do you keep a kosher kitchen? Have you burned al your poly-cotton shirts? Polygamy and slavery OK with you?
If that’s too Old Testament for you, have you followed the advice of St Paul and avoided the temptation of marriage?
(BTW, inablity to get a date doesn’t count.)
Lanessa
ok this is too much you know christ is about to return. How could this be possible he’s totally going against the bible. Well i know that he’s no into God’s word nor is he seeking Gods face. Oh well unless he get right with God he’ll bust hell wide open
pee movies
Optimus magister, bonus liber – The best teacher is a good book