Episcopal Church in California Opposes
Marriage Between Man and Woman
On November 4, California voters will affirm or deny that marriage is between a man and a woman.
What says The Episcopal Church (TEC) – a tax-exempt institution that by law should not attempt to influence legislation? According to a recent report by internet journalist David Virtue, a member of ETF’s Advisory Council, a lesbian priest in the Golden State has set up a campaign post at All Saints’ in Pasadena for defeating Proposition 8, which provides for an amendment to the state constitution:
“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Rev. Susan Russell doesn’t think so, and all but one of the Episcopal bishops in California agree with her. “Come join us at All Saints Pasadena Phone Bank to Defeat Proposition 8!” she urges. “Training is provided by ‘NO ON 8!’ trainers in the Acolyte Room, with phoning in the Office of Creative Connections trailer. You can just show up (with your fully-charged cell phone in the event there aren’t enough phones) and bring a friend!”
Proposition 8 is the People of California’s retort to the May 15 ruling of the California Supreme Court that the current law defining marriage as between a man and a woman is unconstitutional. Despite the efforts of the Episcopal anti-marriage squad, the Californian in the pew seems to think that marriage should be between husband and wife, not homosexual partners. A CBS 5 (San Francisco) poll released three weeks before Election Day indicates that support for Proposition 8 is growing. Among likely voters, the marriage amendment led 47-42%. Voters 18-34 supported the measure 53-39%.
Across the nation, the Connecticut Supreme Court overstepped its bounds onto legislative turf October 10 with a ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. Last year, the Massachusetts Legislature defeated a proposed amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Another marriage amendment cannot be tested at the Bay State polls until 2012. In the meantime, same-sex couples can marry in Massachusetts, then return to their home states and challenge laws and constitutional amendments defining marriage. And the trickle becomes a torrent, then a deluge.
Think of all the territory between the East and West Coasts to be won over by the revisionists, with the support of the Episcopal Church, which apparently has already been won over by the LGBTs (lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender), as Rev. Russell calls her comrades in Integrity, the LGBT lobby of the Episcopal Church. In New York Gov. David A. Paterson recently issued an executive order requiring government agencies to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, with other state officials sure to follow, sheep-like.
The language of the California proposition does not remove any rights or benefits from contractual agreements between homosexual couples, who already enjoy equal rights under the law. It simply states the obvious – that marriage is an institution that developed before there were laws or courts in order to ensure that a man and a woman establish a secure, orderly environment in which to raise children and transfer to the next generation values and property.
That’s the basic, secular definition of marriage. The Christian definition of Holy Matrimony futher refines the concept, as a union ordained by God and adorned by Christ at the Wedding at Cana, thus establishing the cornerstone of civilization, two persons designed to complement each other, joined together, wed, “Let no man put asunder!” This is the tenet cherished by the Episcopal Church – until now
If voters take time to look below the surface of this rush to the once-sacred, now profane, altar, they might discover that the legal maneuvering isn’t really about equal rights for a vocal minority that shouts its name from the rooftops, all the sound and fury drowning out the voice of reason, tradition, and faith. Same-sex “marriage,” for all the hoop-la, is merely a means to an end. It’s really all about destroying the institution of marriage and undermining the Church, and through the Church, the culture.
Why would Episcopal Church leaders do such a thing?
Loading ...