The Episcopalians bridal buggery

by Les Kinsolving for WorldNetDaily
Posted: December 18, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

From the dearth of any news reports to the contrary, the Episcopal Church's presiding bishop, the Most Reverend Katherine Jefferts Schori, apparently had no comment on the latest bizarre news from the Diocese of New Hampshire.

Episcopal Bishop Vickie Gene Robinson (yes, that is actually his name)
announced: "I've always wanted to be a June bride!" This memorable revelation of next June's civilly unionizing of himself with his homosexual lover begs the question as to why Bishop Vickie Gene designated himself as the bride rather than his male lover? Was it because this lover asked the bishop to marry him as their version of what is traditionally known as The Big Question?

Or did this have something to do with the physical aspects of their
relationship? Within days of this male bishop's announcement of his forthcoming June bridehood, the first entire diocese in the Episcopal Church voted
overwhelmingly to get out, leave, secede and depart from this U.S.
denomination of tolerated bridal buggery.

In Fresno, Calif., the 47-church Diocese of San Joaquin voted overwhelmingly
to leave the Episcopal Church and affiliate with other Anglicans overseas.

This did not result in no comment from Presiding Bishop Schori, as did
the New Hampshire male-bride announcement.

Schori announced that she received this news "with sadness" and she went
on to say: "We deeply regret their unwillingness or inability to live within the
historical Anglican understanding of comprehensiveness."

This ecclesiastical sweet talk of regret, when translated, really means
that this most Reverend Lady has in mind the following:

"We'll see you in court! We are a legal establishment of religion, a
Corporation. If your conscience leads you to reject any new rules and
beliefs we enact in General Convention, you are free to exercise your
right to worship. But if you do so, we will seize all of your church property!"

Will all secular courts tolerate this bizarre manifestation of Christian
charity which could be described as a Real Estate Inquisition?
How in the name of the First Amendment can any civil court in the United
States allow the guaranteed exercise of religious freedom to be penalized by
property confiscation?

This especially applies in the case of two of the 11 Episcopal churches,
Truro and Falls Church, that have seceded from the Diocese of Virginia,
which is presently suing them in civil court.

Truro and Falls Church were both founded before the Episcopal Church or
the United States existed.

Why should any court allow their property to be seized by either the Episcopal Church or by the Church of England, from which they also rebelled during the American Revolution?

Presiding Bishop Schori also threatened more seceding dioceses. But the
Diocese of Pittsburgh's Bishop Duncan replied that he would not compromise
the faith of the Apostles. And when Schori similarly threatened Bishop Iker
of Forth Worth, he rebuked what he described as her "aggressive, dictatorial
posturing" and warned that her threats "do not frighten us."


Les Kinsolving hosts a daily talk show for WCBM in Baltimore. His radio
commentaries are syndicated nationally. He is White House correspondent
for WorldNetDaily. His show can be heard on the Internet 9-11 p.m. Eastern
each weekday. Before going into broadcasting, Kinsolving was a newspaper
reporter and columnist - twice nominated for the Pulitzer Prize for his
commentary.