(RNS) Bishop Gene Robinson, whose 2003 election as the first openly gay Episcopal bishop rocked the Anglican Communion, has announced his divorce from his longtime partner and husband.

Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson, right, entered a New Hampshire civil union with his longtime partner, Mark Andrew, left, at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Concord, N.H. At center is Justice of the Peace Ronna Wise.

Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson, right, entered a New Hampshire civil union with his longtime partner, Mark Andrew, left, at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Concord, N.H. At center is Justice of the Peace Ronna Wise. Religion News Service file photo courtesy Mike Barwell


This image is available for Web and print publication. For questions, contact Sally Morrow.

Robinson, who retired in 2013 as the bishop of New Hampshire, and his partner of 25 years, Mark Andrew, were married in a private civil union in 2008. The announcement was made public Saturday (May 3) in a statement to the Diocese of New Hampshire.

“As you can imagine, this is a difficult time for us — not a decision entered into lightly or without much counseling,” Robinson wrote in a letter. “We ask for your prayers, that the love and care for each other that has characterized our relationship for a quarter century will continue in the difficult days ahead.”

He explained his views on marriage and divorce further in a column for the Daily Beast.

“It is at least a small comfort to me, as a gay rights and marriage equality advocate, to know that like any marriage, gay and lesbian couples are subject to the same complications and hardships that afflict marriages between heterosexual couples,” Robinson wrote.

Hundreds of parishes left the Episcopal Church, many in protest of his controversial consecration.

“Whenever you choose to or are called into living a public life, one of the prices you pay for that is public scrutiny, so it’s not surprising that people will pay attention to this,” said Susan Russell, an Episcopal priest at All Saints Church in Pasadena, Calif., and past president of the LGBT advocacy group Integrity USA.

Robinson, 66, is now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C.

“My belief in marriage is undiminished by the reality of divorcing someone I have loved for a very long time, and will continue to love even as we separate,” Robinson wrote in his column. “Love can endure, even if a marriage cannot.”

The couple’s 2008 civil union was automatically transferred to marriage when New Hampshire legalized gay marriage in 2009, according to Russell.

In 2012, the Episcopal Church voted to allow bishops to permit priests to bless same-sex marriages. Russell said further discussion about the church’s canon law and prayer book in relation to gay and lesbian concerns will be held at the denomination’s convention next year.

Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson gave the invocation on Sunday, Jan. 18, 2009, to begin the Welcoming Ceremony for Barack Obama's presidential inauguration.

Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson gave the invocation on Jan. 18, 2009, to begin the welcoming ceremony for Barack Obama’s presidential inauguration. Religion News Service photo by David Jolkovski


This image is available for Web publication. For questions, contact Sally Morrow.

Robinson went public with his sexual identity and divorce from his wife in 1986. He has since been open about the heavy toll he has faced under public scrutiny. Eight years ago, he underwent treatment for alcoholism.

Robinson declined to speak further in an interview. 

Critics say Robinson’s actions defied scriptural authority and thousands of years of Christian tradition. His divorce could fuel the fire, said Douglas LeBlanc, an Episcopalian who reported on Robinson’s consecration when he was an editor at Christianity Today.

“I’m sure there might be some conservatives who might say, ‘We told you so all along: if you depart from church teachings on homosexuality, you’re opening the door to all kinds of chaos,’” LeBlanc said. “In many ways, I think you are. But I think it’s imperative to say, the House of Bishops is not lacking on heterosexual sin.”

The Episcopal Church’s deliberations on same-sex marriage will likely continue regardless of Robinson’s divorce, LeBlanc said. Some, though, might seize on the news of his divorce.

“People will perhaps rub his nose in this for the rest of his life when he’s debating folks on the sexuality wars,” LeBlanc said. “It probably won’t shock a lot of people and will sadden a lot of people, too.”

Robinson is no longer the only openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church. Bishop Mary D. Glasspool was consecrated in Los Angeles in 2010.

In the past decade, the Episcopal Church followed the decline in other mainline Protestant denominations and lost 24 percent in average Sunday attendance over 10 years. It had about 1.8 million members in 2012, the last year for which statistics are available.

YS/AMB END BAILEY

129 Comments

  1. A Doubting Thomas

    How amusing. Divorced a wife, and now a husband while saying he supports marriage. But if divorce is fine and serial in succession, why has the Episcopal Church in America complained as so many parishes divorced them? One notes that in divorce, issues of control and money are the large and legal game, and so it is wise to conclude that Robinson and his national leader, Jeffers-Schori, feel the sanctity of their “church” is about demanding conformity. When such conformity was not forthcoming and divorce from the Episcopal Church by parishes — and dioceses too — was raised, their loving theology was turned to — surprise — litigation, litigation, money and control. The bi-sexual Robinson proves that bishops can be immoral too. Delicious!

    • CarrotCakeMan

      It’s very telling you find the sad situation in which Bishop Robinson finds himself “amusing,” and the problems of The Episcopal Church “delicious.” This pleasure you take at the troubles others experience as well as your attempt to demean, demonize and dehumanize the very real people of The Episcopal Church are both routine mistakes anti-gays foolishly reveal about themselves. These anti-social misdeeds are why most Americans reject and condemn the anti-gay agenda. Thank you for working to advance equality for LGBT Americans, even though of course you think you’re doing the exact opposite.

          • Why do you even care? Life is short. Aren’t you wasting yours by posting angry/bitter messages on Christian sites?

          • @Joe,

            I wish I could ignore you religion folks 
but apparently your churches can’t keep out of our laws. And we Atheists really can’t let you keep doing that without a challenge.


            We need to resist the Christian Taliban and its Christian Sharia Law.
            Christians feel the need to push others around.
            Evangelicals are spending millions of dollars a year on faith-based intrusions like these:

            State Legalized Murder of Doctors – South Dakota

            Mandatory Trans-vaginal probes – Virginia Legislature


            Preaching the Bible in public schools – funded by Hobby Lobby

            Blocking people from family planning – Texas, 5 other states.

            Obstruction of prescriptions – Illinois, Washington


            Discrimination as religious choice -Arizona (SB-1062)


            Anti-Gay laws – Texas
 & elsewhere

            Anti-women’s rights laws – Texas, Louisina, Virginia


            Biased Counseling laws – South Dakota

            Creationism to replace Science Education: 12 States

            So as long as you are funding these faith-based programs among others
            I will have to challenge you.

            Don’t be angry that Jesus can’t seem to function without all these government programs. I wish Christians could figure out how Jesus might help them without tampering with our public laws.

            Keep your Jesus at home, with your families and at church. Pray in public as long as you like – no problem. JUST DON”T INCLUDE ME and we will get along fine.
            Thanks.

          • Atheist trolls will troll.
            Atheists deeply insecure about their own lack of belief in God, even more so.

      • Raymond Quinlan

        The troubles the faux-marriage Robinson faces, and those of the membership-challenged TEC, and those of their own doing … not the result of some ‘homophobe in the sky’. As for supposedly poor, innocent gays in TEC ~~~~ oh please! Integrity staged a THIRTY FIVE YEAR assault on TEC – a well run and well devised campaign, but a campaign nonetheless designed to take over the formerly-Christian church and to “reduce systemic heterosexuality in the Episcopal Church”, to quote their slogan. Gays are reaping what they deserve and will continue to do so.

        BTW: the notion TEC has ONLY lost 10% of it’s membership is laughable. Once on TEC’s membership list it is virtually impossible to have your name removed. Trust me – I know!

        • CarrotCakeMan

          Once again, an anti-gay attempts to demean, demonize and dehumanize LGBT Americans by hilariously claiming LGBT Americans “took over” the Episcopal Church will backfire, as Americans who don’t suffer themselves from homophobia will take these desperate attempts by anti-gays as evidence the anti-gays themselves are the entire problem here.

          “Gays are reaping what they deserve and will continue to do so.”

          But what Mr. Quinlan thinks LGBT Americans deserve, and what more American churches every day feel LGBT Americans deserve, are two different things. Fortunately, courts are routinely agreeing that what LGBT Americans deserve is equality, as American churches decide LGBT Americans deserve love and respect. That isn’t what you had in mind, is it, Mr. Quinlan, but that is unmistakably what has already happened.

    • It goes to show that the institution of marriage is only sacred for as long as the parties to it think it is. Perhaps we should emulate the Pilgrims, who viewed marriage as a civil contract and not one that the church is a party to.

    • It is obvious to me that you know almost nothing about being gay. You call him a gay man bisexual because once he was married. I have known hundreds of gay men who were once married many with kids and they married mostly to either stop their same sex feelings. longings (which never worked) or got married because it was the Christian thing to do. Thankfully these men woke up to the fact that they are gay and it does more harm to repress their feelings and emotions on who they are then to “come out” and be a fully alive man (or woman) accepting themselves as they are.

        • You sound like the militant atheists in the USSR – sorry but these theories have been tried and tested – and hundreds of millions have died in the process.

      • Wake up to the fact that they are GAY?

        I am sorry I beg to differ.

        They gave in to the notion that it is OK is closer to the point.

        It is a learned behavior, and it has been selected from among the other sexual behavioral traits. Clearly A choice

        Even closer to the point is that it is a temptation.

        Nice story though. It sounds like l you know a lot of people. (“hundreds of gay men who were once married”) Doesn’t sound possible
        Do you do nonfiction too?

    • I left the Episcopal Church over this very bishop. It locks my jaws to have to revisit it. He is not a stable man. He should never have been a bishop, being so unable to sustain monogamous relationships. Serial monogamy? I don’t know what to think. But … Oh well.

    • Nonsense. The failings and sin of one man hardly stand against the actual tradition of Christ’s Church. As long as a man is married before ordination, he remains so and never can remarry. Celibacy demanded is an invention of the Church of Rome alone.

  2. The Bishop proves ‘Doctrine’ is nonsense.
    It is a dumb word and preaching it is a fool’s errand.

    Doctrine means: “This is how it always has to be because some arbitrary ancient theory says so”

    It is inhuman to expect people to not grow; and to not change.
    Religious people limit themselves under these silly limitations and the Bishop has spent his lifetime advocating such nonsense.

    His entire career of preaching ‘doctrine’ is shown for what it is.
    Impossible nonsense.

    • That is absurd. You cannot judge a doctrine by those who fail to live up to it. That is like saying we should not have any number of laws because there are always some people who break them.

      • I’m not judging the doctrine, I’m pointing out that it is clearly irrelevant because its those who claim to be its adherents are not following it.

        It is like living in a town which claims to stop at red lights – which has no red lights.

        • 99percentatheist

          0 x 0 = atheism. I didn’t make that up. Reality did. Atheist’s rant because they need to drown out their own insanity ringing endlessly in their skulls. Notice the hip-attachment between atheists and support for gay pride.

          Also, there is no such thing as same gender marriage, nor support or celebration of it anywhere in the Bible. Gay pride is only concerned with the spread of gay behavior. LGBT’s “in The Church” shouldn’t come as a surprise. Tares among wheat. Gay Pride was birthed by Stonewall riots and the lasciviousness of the 60′s generation. It is spread like a date rapist does what they do.

          Propaganda of labeling any dissent of gay pride as phobia or hate is just pathetic and desperate demands of an unstable nature.

    • Another atheist believing in nothing and knowing nothing about belief. Doctrine along with tradition constitutes the Spirit alive in the Church. The Aquarian/Hippy fantasy that truth “evolves” is one of the lies that has led the once Christian TEC to ruin.

      • @Hening – I was a Christian for 44 years. I know about belief.
        The problem I’m asking is why isn’t it obvious that there are no ingredients in this recipe?

        Gay pastor marries gay man and gets divorced and keeps preaching.

        Not being a believer, I don’t care what they do. Good for them.
        But I’m baffled why people keep pretending they are ‘following’ Jesus here?

        “If you love me you will keep my commands” – Jesus
        “Bring to me those enemies of mine who would not have me as their king and execute them in front of me.” – Jesus (luke 19:27)

        This is a stunning lack of awareness on your part. By disposing of God’s commands you are acting like Atheists, dealing with these problems not by looking into an ancient book – but by coming to rational, decent decisions without it.

        It is a puzzle.

        • Athiest, your abuse of context here is abhorrent. You quote scripture to make it say what you want. In the scripture you quote, this is a parable about king (not Jesus) and his response to an unfaithful servant.

          This is not Jesus indicating all who do not choose Him as their king should be slain in front of Him. If you are going to try to use scripture to make a point at least try to be reasonably accurate.

          • Wrong, Jeremy.

            The nobleman IS Jesus. He tells the story to scold his followers and remind them that while he is away the followers must stick to the program and preach Jesus – The Parable of the Minas has been used for countless evil slaughters in the past and it is today used as an explanation for why Jesus will have to return a 2nd time – to separate the wheat from the chaff (so to speak).

            “Execute them..”(Luke 19:27) is exactly what Jesus meant.

            There are other places where Jesus is explicit that he “is impatient” and “cannot wait” to “rain fire” down and burn civilization.

            ‘God’ is dangerous, primitive, barbaric nonsense.

    • Exactly, atheist Max. and so the secular doctrines that we have, such as Freedom of speech, etc are all old rotting ideas that must be overturned, right? After all, there are no ideas that humans can adhere to for longer than 20 minutes, we are the new brave advancers of humanity, so down with the doctrine of freedom of speech – right?
      How do atheists say so much with so little knowledge?

      • @Bergontin,
        You seem to be confused about ‘secular constitutions’ and ‘religious doctrines’. These things have nothing in common.

        A Secular Constitutions is alterable and the people who are subject to its laws get a vote.
        Religious doctrines are claims and assertions made by clerics; the laws are arbitrary and the people have absolutely no vote on the matters therein.

        As our Atheist father of the Constitution, Thomas Paine, knew that anything called “doctrine” must be avoided when making law. They knew that God would not allow any changes and clerics would find a way to control the people – as they always do.

        The attitude that religion is benign is part of the problem. We must wake up.

        It is time to abandon religious ‘doctrine’ everywhere and stop elevating it to anything more than throwing virgins into volcanoes.

  3. “People will perhaps rub his nose in this for the rest of his life when he’s debating folks on the sexuality wars,” LeBlanc said. “It probably won’t shock a lot of people and will sadden a lot of people, too.”

    As evidenced by these initial comments on this thread.

  4. Highly congruent behavior. He dismisses all Biblical morality associated with marriage. Why not make it up as he goes along. My only question is why would anyone listen to anything he claims about God, Christianity, or Jesus or anything else religious when it is obvious he is only presenting the world/God according to his own view point. There is no real authority behind his claims other than his own, and each person can make up his or her own mind on these and other issues. Why would anyone need to go to such a clergyman when he or she can make it up as they go along for themselves?

    • Biblical morality concerning marriage is not a road you want to travel on in a modern society. It includes the following:

      -Polygamy, as traditional a definition of marriage as they come
      -Marriage between rapist and victim
      -Taking women as “war prizes”
      -Marriages which include concubines (for pleasure and breeding purposes)
      -Between widow and brother of the deceased as compelled by law

      Btw ALL clergy and sects are just making it up as they go along. No interpretation of the Bible has any more authority as “the correct one” as any other. Its just a matter of what people will accept.

      “Why would anyone need to go to such a clergyman when he or she can make it up as they go along for themselves?”

      Why indeed. There is no actual need. Its just what people do to feel better about themselves or validate their own actions/opinions.

      • Actually, the ethic Jesus lays down for marriage completely obliterates all of the nonsense trash you just attributed to Christian marriage. Jesus’ teaching on marriage is as follows: “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

        What Jesus is saying here is that the *original* plan for marriage is the one that sets the ground rules — it is the ethically perfect version of marriage. This is the coupling of Adam and Eve, which must be the *original* plan for marriage as it happened in an un-fallen world and was, in fact, the first marriage. With Adam and Eve there was no rape, no concubinage, no divorce, no adultery: just one man and one woman sealed together for a lifetime. All of the other concessions made in the arena of marriage were done to adapt the institution to an increasingly sinful and unredeemed humanity.

        With the advent of redemption — the new covenant represented by Christ — came an increase in expectations, and that includes the tightening up of marital ethics. No more divorce, no more tacitly tolerated adultery, no shenanigans of any kind: we’re back to the straight and narrow, the vision of marriage that was intended originally.

        • @Liz,

          You are referring to ideas from the bronze age and trying to justify why they are workable for people today.

          If you know these things need to be modified by intuition and common sense, why not just jettison the ancient nonsense and simply apply intuition and common sense without ever opening a bible?

          I really don’t get it.

          • Raymond Quinlan

            >>@ Max

            You feel the same way about Socrates, Aristotle, Homer, Hippocrates, Plato, Euclid and Archimedes? Or is ti only God whom you are so terrified of?

          • @Raymond,
            I have no fears of gods as I don’t believe in them. Just can’t figure out how it is possible to claim the Bible as absolute truth if you are going to keep fudging around with the laws therein.

            Applying reason and common sense certainly improves religion.
            But at what point have you simply jettisoned the Bible anyway?

            The philosophers you mentioned do not claim anything about being absolute truth so I’ll dismiss that part of your question.

          • Raymond Quinlan

            >>@Max

            In reverse order:

            1. This is you, quoted: “ideas from the bronze age and trying to justify why they are workable for people today.” Those other writers fit – exactly – your complaint, and speak about enduring human truths. Yet you have no issue with them, only those relating to God. Clear as a bell, Sir.

            2. RE: fear. If you were actually secure in your atheism you would have no need to evangelize for your faith. Per your faith all end up simply as dust – true atheist believers or not. There is no advantage to believing – all, according to your religion, end up the same. So you evangelize for some OTHER reason – most likely fear and a desire for fellow travelers. It’s sad people are so fear-driven yet unable to stop fearing. Why cling to a religion predicated on fear? Odd.

          • @Raymond,

            1. Are you putting Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Gospel of Mark in the same group as Socrates, Homer and Archimedes? If so, I approve 100% – You are abandoning the claims of an absolutest God. Thank you. God is the bronze age idea I was talking about. Welcome to atheism.

            2. Fear: I study religion in the same way a cancer doctor studies the disease of cancer. I view faith-based initiatives an insidious threat to civilization: terrorism, genital mutilation, repression of women and gays, etc. I fear for civilization, not Yahweh.

            3. Larry was correct that references to the Bible regarding marriage is a can of worms. Liz responded with this, “With Adam and Eve there was no rape, no concubinage, no divorce, no adultery: just one man and one woman sealed together for a lifetime.”
            Well most of that is pretty easy if there is only one man and one woman on earth!
            If that is the perfect arrangement – a limited number of people on earth to prevent bad behavior – why not just drown all of civilization and start over with a few people? Oh, wait. That was tried. It didn’t work either.

            The much more relevant Biblical marriages are those of Noah and his close family – They all had sex with each other. Incest. And God not only called it good – he planned it for them as a model for his NEW SINLESS WORLD!

            Why choose Adam & Eve as an example when Noah and family incest are just a valid.

            Jesus seems to pull Adam & Eve out of nowhere for an example of ideal marriage. It apparently is lost on Jesus that purity is easy when there are no other women to screw around with!

          • Raymond Quinlan

            >>@ Max

            1. I find I must repeat: You: “ideas from the bronze age and trying to justify why they are workable for people today.” Now you wish to modify your complaint that anything old is of no value. Silly.

            2. A cancer doctor does NOT study cancer with the sole goal of denying it’s existence so he/she is not as terrified of cancer. You and a cancer doctor are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

            3. Naturally, if you reject God (as you do for whatever reason you do) EVERYTHING – including God’s directives concerning marriage – will be, to you, a ‘can of worms’. To rephrase – if you are wise in your own eyes and believe you are intellectually and knowledge-wise with the creator of the universe (though, I presume, you have not yet created one yourself) you will find all your do not understand, and all that seems contradictory in your human-limited mind, to be silly. Silly.

            4. Finally …. I am not much of an evangelist (like you are, of course). And so, though I would prefer you deal with whatever it is that caused you to lash out in anger and bitterness “at God”, I don’t really care all that much and will not have a significantly diminished life should you continue on. That said, I have no interest in convincing you of those things you are resolute to not believe. Best wishes and good luck.

          • @Raymond,

            Please Don’t be angry at your God for not finding a way to convince me of His existence. It isn’t your fault that He has failed in this. Your anger at that issue is misplaced.

            Also, Yes. Absolutely I am wiser than the poor ancient people who thought the world was flat, that stars were gods, that bats were birds and that lightening came from angels. If you must call me prideful for that, so be it. I’ll have to go out on that limb.

            I reject the idea that bats are a kind of bird. Sorry if that makes you mad.

          • Absolutely. /Let’s all follow Max’s common sense. Or should we follow my common sense? Some people’s common sense will say divorce is allowable for not putting down the toilet seat. And after all, a stable home for the children is complete nonsense, who needs that? Divorce away , everybody, Max says it is fine.

        • CarrotCakeMan

          Liz forgot that Jesus affirmed a gay couple. Read Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10. Many of us are familiar with the Gospel story where Jesus healed the servant of a Roman centurion. In the original Greek, the word that the Roman centurion uses in this passage to describe the sick man – pais – is the same word used in ancient Greek to refer to a same-gender partner. Fortunately, many major Christian denominations know what Jesus did, and are marrying same gender couples in those US States where they are allowed to practice their religion fully.

          • Matthew Vines tells us that there was no concept of a “same-gender partner” before the modern period.

          • Was Jesus bi-sexual? Look at this story.
            Did Jesus stumble into a tryst between Peter and “Jesus’ lover”?

            It is written as if He did….

            “Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, “It is the Lord,” he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water” (John 21:7)

            “And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him:
 And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.” (Mark 14:51-52)

            It is right there in plain view. And the other situations where Jesus spends lots of time with Mary Magdelene seem curious as well.
            Sex seems to just happen without marriage in the Jesus circles.

          • I am not saying Jesus was bi-sexual, I’m saying the question is as valid as any other.
            Jesus can be anything you want him to be.

            If you examine all of the claims about Jesus they cannot all be true.
            They contradict too dramatically:
            “Do not trust anyone who witnesses for himself” (John)
            “I witness for myself” (John)

            So one must cherry pick.
            You have no choice. And you build your own Jesus.
            Consider yourself a co-author of the Bible. It is that bad.

          • Mat 8:6

            And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.

            It is easy to verify scripture and its Greek counterpart on a site such as blueletterbible.

            The Luke passage uses the word Kakos (sick) G2560 which means weak/feeble. The Matthew passage uses the word v.6 as palsy and the Greek word for this is G3885 paralytikos which also means weak of limb.

            Not sure where you get your information.

          • CarrotCakeMan

            Kim, I listed below the many major Christian and Jewish denominations which want to marry same gender couples, which is where I get my information. If you’re asking about where anti-gays get their information, that would be the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas, as well as the websites of anti-gay Hate Cults.

          • Ah…It would make sense that you would get the false interpretation of scripture from such sources. Just because there is a “church” in the title..doesn’t make it so.

            Romans 1:18-32 reveals the progress of our moral decline. Many can be described in the very last verse …”Although they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.”

            Grim news for those who think themselves wiser than God.

          • I’m sorry, but Greek is my native language and pais means boy without any sexual connotations… Distorting that for the sake of your argument is most preposterous…

          • @Stefanos

            “I’m sorry, but Greek is my native language and pais means boy without any sexual connotations… Distorting that for the sake of your argument is most preposterous”

            Thank you for clarifying….Actually I looked up the wrong emphasis “sick” and when I instead looked at the word servant in the Matthew passage there it was “pais” and the KJV translates Strongs G3816 in the following manner: servant (10x), child (7x), son (Christ) (2x), son (1x), manservant (1x), maid (1x), maiden (1x), young man (1x).

        • Your quote only refers to divorce, not the various forms of marriage accepted in Biblical times. You just expanded it to claim it holds for binary heterosexual marriage through nothing but sheer sophistry. Your text certainly didn’t support the rest of your premise.

          The great thing about Christianity is that it never feels the need to be consistent. If you want to sound tough, refer to the OT and claim it ALL has to be obeyed in equal proportions. When one is danger of looking too foolish for saying the latter, just say “Jesus absolved us from following that anymore:

        • Akpokuerherie Pedro

          Liz you are very with your comment about marraige .
          The problem however of divorce is help by the attitude of christians to the written of God in Bible.When celebrity pastors divorce their wives just for any flimsy excuse apart from adultry with recourse to what the Bible says.Men have become lovers of their own selves,and lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God, so what do you expect from who does not love God? He can not obey the commandments of God. Thanks Liz for your comment.

    • No, he’s not. Gene Robinson is just the first one to — in complete opposition to the Christian faith and teachings he claims to believe in and represent— add the blatant sin of homosexuality to his professional resumé and promote that behavior through his blasphemous relationship and “marriage” to another man. And in doing so, splitting not only his own denomination, but causing harm to the Christian Church as a whole.

      It’s no surprise that Robinson’s “marriage” didn’t last. Everything he’s done has proven him to be a self-centered narcissist of the first order… concerned about satisfying his OWN selfish wants and needs, regardless of the damage and hurt it causes others.

      This is simply par for the course from him.

      • Raymond Quinlan

        Alex: Yes, perhaps Robinson DID do all of those reprehensible and anti-Christian things. But he remains a terrific poster child example of conforming to the world.

      • CarrotCakeMan

        Alex, please stop trying to drag all Christians down to the level of the anti-gays. isn’t one of the central facets of this news article the fact that this, among many other Christian denominations, rejects homophobia and marries same gender couples?

        • Translation:
          “Alex, please stop trying to hold Gene Robinson and churches supporting homosexuality to the standards of the Bible they falsely claim to believe in. Isn’t one of the central facets of this news article the fact that this, among many other Christian denominations, rejects the clear teachings of God and the Bible that repeatedly condemns the practice of homosexual behavior and those who would support it?”

          There… fixed it for you. :)
          Go peddle your lies to someone stupid enough to believe them.

          ANY Christian or church that embraces and supports homosexual behavior or homosexual “marriage” — despite the clear teachings in both the Old and New Testaments that such acts are sinful and offensive to God — has rejected God in favor of Satan.

          They’re just as poisonous, hypocritical and blasphemous as a Christian or church that embraces adultery or incest and then defends their sinful behavior with ridiculous claims that such lifestyles are “acts of love” that God supports.

          • And if this was a mega-church pastor who ran out of his marriage with his secretary, you would be praying for his soul and claiming the devil took hold of him.

            Grace, forgiveness and Christian love of thy neighbor only is reserved for people you agree with. Typical Christian hypocrite.

          • CarrotCakeMan

            Don’t try to put anti-gay Hate Speech into my mouth, Alex. Try that somewhere out in public, and you will quickly find out how Americans feel about your anti-gay Hate Speech. Take a look at how the people of Moore, Oklahoma reacted:

            http://www.koco.com/news/counter-protesters-push-westboro-baptist-church-members-out-of-moore/25350082#ixzz2yGJhESoN

          • Spoken like a person truly ignorant of the teachings of Christ and the Bible, CarrotCakeMan. You’re far more concerned about how an easily-manipulated and shallow society feels about sinful behavior than you are about how Holy GOD (who made the rules in the first place) feels about it.

            What you two clearly don’t understand is that, unlike the “mega-church pastor who ran out of his marriage with his secretary,” Gene Robinson — after violating Scriptural doctrine by running out of his first marriage and embracing a homosexual lifestyle — compounded his sinful and destructive behavior in two ways.

            One, he had the shameful arrogance to not only stay WITHIN church leadership, thoroughly weakening any authority he, or anyone in the Episcopal Church had on Scriptural doctrine, or the importance of following it, thus leaving a horrible example for those under him to follow. If a BISHOP will flagrantly disregard the standards and doctrine laid down in the Bible, why should anyone else follow them???

            And two, Robinson had the nerve to insist that HE wasn’t wrong about the immorality of his behavior. Instead, he laid the blame with God’s Word — the BIBLE and Scriptures — claiming that IT was wrong (or, at best, misinterpreted for thousands of years) in condemning homosexual behavior.

            The Devil has, indeed, taken hold of Gene Robinson. And we continue to pray for him… as well as for people like you, who foolishly seek to enable his sinful activities and mislead others regarding the Truth of the Bible.

            Unfortunately, Gene Robinson’s main sin remains his thorough unrepentance regarding his rejection of God’s Laws and his foolish commitment to putting his OWN selfish and destructive desires before those of God. And until he changes course and returns to Christ (if he ever belonged to Him), Gene is undoubtedly on a fast track straight to the Hell he’s been eagerly running towards for decades.

      • Its funny how you have to deny the validity of the entire Episcopal Church just because they didn’t want to act as bigoted as you. It really shows how little, people like yourself respect notions like freedom of religion. Typical fundamentalist egotism.

        As long as they conform to YOUR ideas of faith, they are Christians. I wonder who gave you such authority? Anybody I should care about?

        • No, we “deny the validity of the entire Episcopal Church” in areas where they REJECT the Word of God, as written in the Bible. The same Bible that they claim to believe in.

          The key test of any doctrine of the Christian church SHOULD be: “Is this supported by Scripture, or does it go AGAINST and violate Scripture?” If it violates the teachings of Christ and the New Testament, then it should be REJECTED by any church that calls itself “Christian.”

          And if a church, like the Episcopalian denomination, EMBRACES and CONDONES sinful behavior (such as homosexuality) that the Old and New Testament repeatedly condemn and call offensive to God, then that church should be rejected by Christians for teaching false doctrine.

          Christians should NOT blindly worship and bow down to the teachings of a denomination. As many church leaders like Gene Robinson have shown, humanity can easily corrupt Biblical doctrine for its own selfish ends.

          Instead, Christians are called to follow the teachings of Christ and The Bible. THAT is the only standard to which we’ll all be held accountable to by God.

          • @Alex,
            “The key test of any doctrine of the Christian church SHOULD be: “Is this supported by Scripture, or does it go AGAINST and violate Scripture?”

            Very funny!
            Any church which clearly states that “BATS are a kind of Bird”
            is a true Christian Church!

            ROFL!

          • The truly hilarious thing is an avowed atheist pretending to speak with any wisdom or authority regarding Biblical scripture he claims doesn’t believe in. :)

            Sad, but funny.

          • I will ask again, but a little more bluntly:
            So who died and made you God, Alex?

            Alex, just because people believe differently than you do, doesn’t mean they are not an actual religion or sect. Just because you feel like saying they are not really Christian does not make it so. All you are doing is showing me how little you respect notions of religious freedom. That people worship as they see fit.

            Nobody has to care what are your criteria for a “true church” or what is the proper behavior of a Christian. Nothing you say denies that they are a church with their own religious beliefs and rites. Nobody has to take your views as to what a Christian should do seriously.

            It is telling that your view of religion is guided entirely by sectarian bigotry. All you are doing is inflating your ego with delusions of being the sole arbiter of what the word of God is.

            Do me a favor.

            The next time you feel like complaining about your religious freedom being attacked, shut the hell up. You have no respect for faiths besides your own. You have no concept of what religious freedom entails.

      • That is probably not true either.

        Especially when it used to be common for religious minded people to “stay in the closet” and marry outside their orientation to “keep up appearances”.

        He is probably the only member of clergy to do so at this time. .

  5. Deacon John M. Bresahan

    We had a similar situation at an area Episcopal church.
    A prominent Catholic priest from down South left the Catholic Church to marry.
    He became an Episcopal priest and received a position in a northern Episcopal parish near here.
    At that Episcopal Church he became enamored of one of the Episcopal church’s womenpriests assigned there. So, they ran off together.
    There does seem to be a connection between those Christians attacking traditional Christian morality and practices and those Atheist Max called: “self-centered narcissists.”

  6. As a conservative this brings no satisfaction or sense of “winning.” There’s no “told you so” in this. It simply needs to rest as a continued reason to be heartbroken that the church, in its affirmation, has let down Gene Robinson in allowing him to be a victim of his own sin. Orthodox teachings should be, above all else, honest. In this sense we have abandoned, not only homosexuals, but also heterosexuals who continue to be affirmed in their ongoing rebellion of a redeemed sexual life.

  7. Raymond Quinlan

    1. Typical gay apologetics: “But I think it’s imperative to say, the House of Bishops is not lacking on heterosexual sin.” As if that makes GAY sin any better???

    2. Glossing over the obvious does not negate it. Defy Scripture …. expect a life of chaos.

    3. “Life according to Robinson”: (a) divorce. (b) go gay. (c) foment the demise of TEC. (d) partake in a fake ‘marriage’ {sic}. (e) become a drunk. (f) divorce from fake marriage. What’s next … drugs? Celebration of Bael?

      • Don’t worry, CarrotCakeMan… the selfish and destructive things that Gene Robinson has ALREADY done to his church, himself and our society in general are bad enough already. We don’t need to fantasize.

      • No Validity.

        The episcopal church was not specifically mentioned in the bible.

        It has no validity except that which is given by scripture. So… if they diverge, so goes their validity. Every last bit.

        You go Alex. I am right there with you.

        These mental midgets are no match.

    • CarrotCakeMan

      And what a sad, vicious attack on the denominations that will marry same gender couples in 18 US States and the District of Columbia:

      Affirming Pentecostal Church International
      Alliance of Christian Churches
      Anointed Affirming Independent Ministries
      The Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists
      Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
      Community of Christ
      Conservative Judaism
      Ecumenical Catholic Church
      Ecumenical Catholic Communion
      The Episcopal Church
      Evangelical Anglican Church In America
      Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
      Global Alliance of Affirming Apostolic Pentecostals
      Inclusive Orthodox Church
      Metropolitan Community Church
      Old Catholic Church
      Progressive Christian Alliance
      Reconciling Pentecostals International
      Reconstructionist Judaism
      Reform Judaism
      Reformed Anglican Catholic Church
      Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
      Unitarian Universalist Church
      United Church of Christ
      Unity Church

      • Many thanks for listing all of the churches that have clearly rejected the teachings and standards of Jesus Christ in favor of worshiping the weak standards of a sinful world.

        It’s always nice to know which churches should be avoided like the plague.

        • Alex I am starting to feel bad for these gays.. i mean guys.

          At first I thought they were kidding. But now I know they are serious.

          These poor folks are in a serious predicament. and they are lost for lack of knowledge. I am absolutely beside myself about how they can buy such lies.

          It has been nice reading you, one clear thinker among many fools.

          Stay firmly in His grip and never let up.

          Im outa here.

        • I think Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism have more than 2 members. They are most common sects of that faith in the US and Europe :)

          Are you done being an ignorant sectarian bigot or do you have any other religious groups to insult?

  8. Neon Genesis

    I love how the evangelical Christians on this site have no problems being nice and forgiving to Derek Webb and his wife during their divorce yet they turn around and act with such vile to Robinson.

    • You tried to make this point over on the Webb article.. You failed both times. First, Robinson is a Bishop. He carries Biblical scrutiny beyond that of Webb who is not functioning in such a position. The only thing that gets Webb’s divorce notice is that he is an entertainer. He is a product of a social aspect of the population of the church. Robinson is a product of the church. Second, you draw your ire from the content of an article that does not reflect the viewpoint of all evangelicals. I’m not sure what the trendy definition of an evangelical currently is, so I can’t tell you if I’m one or not. However, I can tell you that the sin of homosexuality and the sin of adultery weighs heavy on my heart. When I read of Webb’s divorce I was heartbroken because sin has moved two individuals (Webb and the woman he committed adultery with) toward destruction and has damaged the lives of many others. Third, you ignore that Webb’s wife stated that he is taking responsibility for his actions. This is in contrast to Robinson who seemingly deflects the weight of his sin on the church. He denies wrongdoing. This alone would produce a different reaction. Fourth, thank you for giving a good comparison of Gene Robinson’s sin with that of adultery. Both are very devastating. May we as Christians learn an appropriate response to each, so that the offender may be encouraged to repent and rectify their lives before our eternal Lord.

  9. I feel bad for him. He is probably going through a horrible heartbreak and everyone is only focused on the fact he is gay. Get over it. How rude to use the name of God to justify hatred for a man of God. A man who served his life to teaching of God’s love. Pray for him to have peace not for him to change to fit society’s standards. It affects no one whatsoever who he married or divorced. I find it ironic how the heterosexual couples divorce rate is more than 50% yet the one time a gay man gets divorced it is big news.

    “A new commandment I give unto you is to love one another as I have loved you and this is how the’ll know that you belong to me.” – John 1334

    • CarrotCakeMan

      Thank you for bringing love and kindness to this anti-gay hatefest. However, it’s important to remember anti-gays are deeply disturbed individuals. Psychologists identified homophobia as a mental illness and published their results in the Journal of the National Institutes of Health in 1953, but Freud himself coined the term. Homophobia is the irrational fear, disgust, or hatred of gays, lesbians, and/or bisexual people, or of homosexual feelings in oneself. It refers to the discomfort one feels with any behavior, belief, or attitude (in self or others) that does not conform to traditional sex role stereotypes. Homophobia exhibits itself in the fear of knowing, befriending, or associating with gays, lesbians, or bisexual people; fear of being perceived as gay or lesbian; and/or fear of stepping out of accepted gender role behavior. Psychologists report that the most commonly observed symptom of the mental disorder homophobia is cognitive dissonance, an inability of those so afflicted to accept documentation that contradicts their deep-seated phobia and hatred of LGBT Americans.

  10. Say it enough times and it will begin to take hold. People will start believing.

    Not me though. I am most interested in this “documentation that contradicts my deep-seated phobia”

    I haven’t seen any of those.

    Can you turn me on to one?

  1. […] Gene Robinson, first openly gay Episcopal bishop, announces his divorceReligion News Service(RNS) Bishop Gene Robinson, whose 2003 election as the first openly gay Episcopal bishop rocked Anglican Communion, has announced his divorce from his longtime partner and husband. Episcopal Bishop V. Gene Robinson, right, entered a New … […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments with many links may be automatically held for moderation.