Homosexual Bishop: Oxymoron

I noted a news story today regarding the openly homosexual Episcopal bishop V. Gene Robinson and his plans to enter into a civil union with his male partner under the pending New Hampshire law allowing such. This whole thing is wrong on so many levels, starting with the tolerance agenda to gain mainstream acceptance of the sin of homosexuality and the acquiescing of the state in sanctioning such abominal relationships. What really pains me, though, is the way that this supposed man of God flaunts his sin, revels in it, claims to be taking the moral high ground in it, and continues to claim that he is on a mission from God as a bishop in the church of Jesus Christ. And when I go to the Word of Christ to see what the requirements are for a man to hold this office of bishop, here's what I find:

It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer (KJV: bishop), it is a fine work he desires to do. An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?), and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil. And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. (1Timothy 3:1-7)

So what does the Head of His church have to say about these matters? I see no room in this or any other passage of Scripture, either Old or New Testament, that supports the Rev. Robinson's lifestyle, opinions, practices or his holding the office of bishop. I see instead disqualifications on a number of fronts, and in fact I see a man judged and found guilty of a heinous sin against God. Much more so as a purported under-shepherd of the flock of Christ.

Does this bother you? As much as it should? I have a huge commitment to the Body of Christ and its purity and growth. Think of the words of Paul to the Ephesian church regarding the price that Christ paid for His bride, the Church, and the reason He paid that price:

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. (Ephesians 5:25-27)

The church is to be sanctified, cleansed, with no spot or stain of sin but rather holy and blameless. But when the shepherds of the flock of Christ are themselves unholy, stained and spotted, how can they lead and pastor their flocks to the fulfillment of Christ's plan for the church? How can they claim to represent the authority of Christ when they openly disregard and show disdain for His truth and words? How can they have a good reputation to those outside the church, when they are indistinguishable from the worst of rank pagans in their practices? Yes, we Biblical evangelicals can try to take refuge in saying that, well Robinson really isn't a Biblical Christian, he is just a figure in a dying institutional church. But when we say that we deceive ourselves, since we have to take him at his words and his deeds. The Episcopal tradition certainly includes many, many true believers in Christ. Whether the Rev. Robinson is part of the true Body of Christ or not is irrelevant - he claims to be and has been recognized as such and as worthy of a leadership position.

When the church of Jesus Christ fails to discern sin in her midst, and especially in her leaders, she is no longer the church. She is a harlot that her Husband does not even recognize. Lord, we trust that by your grace you have and will sustain a remnant that is faithful to You.