More on the Gay Bishop at Inauguration

On Monday, I noted that President-elect Barack Obama has invited openly gay bishop Gene Robinson to pray at the inauguration. The New York Times reports on this selection and includes a brief interview with Bishop Robinson:

Bishop Robinson said he had been reading inaugural prayers through history and was “horrified” at how “specifically and aggressively Christian they were.”

“I am very clear,” he said, “that this will not be a Christian prayer, and I won’t be quoting Scripture or anything like that. The texts that I hold as sacred are not sacred texts for all Americans, and I want all people to feel that this is their prayer.”

Bishop Robinson said he might address the prayer to “the God of our many understandings,” language that he said he learned from the 12-step program he attended for his alcohol addiction.

This morning, Albert Mohler posted an interesting commentary on Robinson’s remarks. Mohler writes:

The bishop’s comments reveal just about everything one needs to know about his theology.  He pledges that “this will not be a Christian prayer” and he “won’t be quoting Scripture or anything like that.”  No, nothing like that. . . The “God of our many understandings” is a confused composite — a very postmodern idol.  Clive James is quite right about the theological crisis of unbelieving bishops – but you need go no farther than New Hampshire to find an example.

16 Responses to More on the Gay Bishop at Inauguration

  1. Joe Blackmon January 14, 2009 at 9:43 am #

    Actually, I think ol’ Gene is a perfect follow up act to Rick Warren since neither of them are likely to say anything God honoring or Christ exalting.

  2. Don Johnson January 14, 2009 at 10:41 am #

    I can see that one might tailor a message to the audience, but his stance is so minimal only atheists will take offense. I think we see which extreme on the exclusiveness/inclusiveness spectrum Robinson is on.

  3. JB January 14, 2009 at 10:56 am #

    Dear Bishop,
    If you can’t see the big E on the top of the eye chart, it’s time to turn in your keys.

  4. Joshua January 14, 2009 at 11:50 am #

    Well played JB.

    Having read the Book of Common Prayer a couple years ago, that theology he professes in that article isn’t true to the Anglican-Christian faith. So how is he a Bishop, when he doesn’t profess the faith he currently to residing over?

  5. volfan007 January 14, 2009 at 12:01 pm #

    Well, I guess we see the Apostate Church in action once again. The heretics are running the show, which is what they and the Devil want.

    It’s absolutely incredible that a denomination, or a Church, which professes to be Christian, would havea gay Bishop who declares these things in the quote. Astounding.

    But, I guess it’s a sign of the times in which we live.

  6. Brian Krieger January 14, 2009 at 12:29 pm #

    “horrified” at how “specifically and aggressively Christian they were.”

    I don’t understand why HE would want to be associated with a Christian denomination (other than the fact that if he weren’t, no one would even give him the time of day, I suppose). If you want to jettison beliefs, be bold and do so. Go nail your 95 theses on the door and head out preaching your “truth”. I suppose I just don’t get it.

    It’s like David says, just the times we live in (it’s like everyone does what’s right in their own eyes or something….)

  7. Brian Krieger January 14, 2009 at 12:32 pm #

    Err…..just to clarify, I meant nail his own version of his 95 theses. I am not castigating Luther there.

  8. Leslie Puryear January 14, 2009 at 2:56 pm #

    If this is indicative of the modern Episcopal church, then they are in deep, deep spiritual trouble.

    Thank God Southern Baptists are debating each other about theology rather than this evil business.


  9. PT Money January 14, 2009 at 7:03 pm #

    That’s one of the funniest things I’ve read in a while. It seemed like something off of The Onion.

    Those darn Christians…acting all Christian-like. Horrifying!

    Funny, but then really sad that this guy was Obama’s choice.

  10. James Brown January 14, 2009 at 7:41 pm #

    Well the evangelical world doesn’t have to guess where “the bish” stands on Biblical orthodoxy.

  11. Darius T January 14, 2009 at 9:01 pm #

    “I don’t understand why HE would want to be associated with a Christian denomination…”

    You know, I’ve often wondered that. I feel it must come down to a spiritual issue… Satan is controlling him. Otherwise, any rational person wouldn’t want to be part of a club if he disagreed with almost every single basic rule of that club… unless he wanted to damage the club. If you consider similar situations in today’s world, that’s almost always the motive. Women playing at Augusta, gays in the Boy Scouts, Gene Robinson in the Body… all have the same motive: to hurt or radically change the group they want to join.

  12. Matt Svoboda January 14, 2009 at 9:22 pm #


    So Warren doesnt ever say anything God honoring or Christ exalting? What is not God honoring and Christ exalting is you slandering a man because you disagree on minor issues with him. He does not preach a false gospel, support gay marraige, abortion, etc… Why the slander? Because you disagree with his philosophy of ministry or dont like the way he presents the gospel?

  13. Joe Blackmon January 14, 2009 at 10:25 pm #


    Slander is spoken. In print (or on the internet) it’s called libel. There are also pretty specific legal requirements for something to fall into either catagory.

    Grace and peace

  14. Matt Svoboda January 14, 2009 at 11:32 pm #


    Nice job dodging my point with word games.

  15. Joe Blackmon January 15, 2009 at 8:50 am #


    Thank you

  16. Chris H January 15, 2009 at 1:44 pm #

    Hey guys, just remember to smile and enjoy the whole tragicomedy train wreck of a circus show.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes