This latt cisn by the Epispal Church to perm gay marriage has been highly cricized by other branch of the Anglin Church.
Contents:
THE ANGLIN CHURCH’S ‘KICK THE GUTS’ TO GAY PARISHNERS
Letters:<strong> Ian Gordon</strong>, <strong>Stephen Evans,</strong> <strong>William Bartram</strong> and <strong>Meirn Bowen</strong> rpond to Archbishop Jt Welby’s affirmatn that gay sex is a s * anglican church and gay *
On 7 June 2003 Gene Robson be the first openly gay bishop the Epispal church of the US; on 3 Augt 2022 Archbishop Jt Welby “affirms validy” of the 1998 Lambeth claratn that homosexual relatnships are patible wh scripture (Jt Welby ‘affirms validy’ of 1998 gay sex is s claratn, 2 Augt). Ian GordonFolktone, Kent The affirmatn that gay sex is a s will e much nsternatn, cludg among many Anglins who regnise the sufferg that this regrsive posn has flicted on gay people. William BartramHampton, Greater London I spect that a lot of people will share my disgt at the affirmatn that gay sex is a s.
Pl even scrib reemed people, who were once idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, and so forth, as spirually “chaste virgs” through the cleansg blood of Christ (2 Corthians 11:1-2). He wr, “…homosexualy has bee an inty, not jt a s… We, as the church, mt strive to treat those who stggle wh this s wh more re, and those the LGBT muny wh more Christlike love.
Some argue for the term of “gay Christian. Among those who advote for the term gay Christian ( should be noted that there is diversy of theologil opn here), some argue that the word “gay” is a more ntemporary synonym for same-sex attracted. Others pos that “gay” is ed as a scriptor rather than a fer.
DEAR GAY ANGLINS LETTER
Gog eper, some employ a very nuanced argument that while gay lt is sful, gay attractn self need not be ltful but n reprent an athetic appreciatn of bety and a sire for chaste iendship. Many wh this muny g the term gay Christian argue that the phrase “same-sex attractn” is unknown among the larger LGBT muny and, therefore, lacks need missn engagement.
Conversely, those who employ the language of same-sex attractn are ncerned that g the adjective “gay” to modify the noun “Christian, ” “obscur the disorred nature of same-sex sire. They also argue that when someone the general culture intifi themselv as gay, there is an implic acceptance of same-sex behavr. They would suggt that most non-Christians would therefore assume that people who label themselv as gay Christians would rrpondgly accept same-sex sexual exprsn, cludg same-sex marriage.
We pot out three problems we see biblilly and historilly wh g such signatns as “gay Christian, ” and, for that matter, “same-sex attracted believer. One, there is the nfn ed by lack of fn and mon unrstandg of signatns such as “gay Christian, ” and “same-sex attracted believer.