After giving an address at Virginia Seminary recently, in response to a question of what is at the root of opposition to same-sex blessings and related issues, Canon Charles Robertson, who works directly for the Presiding Bishop, said, “It often comes down to fear of change, but even that’s too easy. It often comes down to fear of the other.” He advocated building relationships with “the other” using agreed-upon rules of interaction.
This information and quote is found in a recent “The Living Church” article which can be found here.
Before I continue, let me say that it is quite possible the quote is wrong. I have a pretty good measure of trust in the reporting ability of Steve Waring, though, so unless a retraction is made, I’m going to accept it. However, whether Robertson was quoted accurately or not, I’m going to share my thoughts based on what I read; my response to the quote is still real and valid.
I had two moments of hope reading that quote. The quote is at the end of the article, and reading through the first part of the article I could generally agree with what was being reported as part of his lecture (the anxiety levels around the Church, the need to drop litmus tests such as this, etc.). So maybe I had a little trust going.
The first moment of hope came as Canon Robertson, after suggesting “fear of change” was quoted to say, “….but even that’s too easy.” My hope came as I looked for his pointing to members’ beliefs and trust in the reading of the Bible. That is to say, it is too easy to simply jettison opposition of same-sex unions, and the blessing or marriage thereto, as a matter of emotional fear, and thus unwarranted discrimination and prejudice, when it is quite obvious that there is a biblical clarity on the matter and that belief can be held without any personal animosity toward those who seek normalization. Anger that appears can actually be understood as not about fear of change, but as against the rejection of that which is understood as God’s standards for sexual acts.
A corollary hope was that – if this first hope was realized – somebody acting as a spokesperson for The Episcopal Church actually got it, they actually understood the scope of the dilemma that the questionner was really asking about.
My second moment of hope came after finishing reading that paragraph. As I read through Canon Charles’ statement, and what he meant by “too easy”, my first hopes were dashed. But in reconsidering, I thought perhaps the journalist Steve misunderstood “other” – that it was supposed to be “the Other” (capital “O”), referring to a healthy fear of God, and what God has to say about the matter (as in my first hope). Surely, if we could take our concerns before the Lord, and make reference to his leading and teaching, we could come to a moment of unity.
But again, no. The answer seems squarely applied to the question asked, which was centered on why there was opposition at all. And if the bible is clear, as the teaching we understand as the written Word of God, and quite consistent moving from Old Testament to New Testament, then fear of “The Other” would actually be eminating from those who are proponents, as well as those opposed.
In fact in must be conceded that those who hold to the Bible, being people who do indeed confess to being God-fearers (“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom”), would have no reasonable objection to same-sex matters if that was noted as permissable in our scriptures.
So my second moment of hope was dashed.
Nope, Canon Robertson, and/or those he speaks for, simply does not get it, or he would have answered differently.
I must say, he does not speak for me, nor the parish I serve, nor at least a simple majority of Episcopalians.
Pray for General Convention ( see http://csgw.wordpress.com )
