Following the controversy swirling in the Episcopal Church since the denomination's convention affirmed the Rev. V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire has been interesting and enlightening.

Interesting because it is not every day we see a church issue so divisive that the aftershocks reverberate around the world. Outside the United States, few among the Anglican Communion — of which The Episcopal Church, USA is the U.S. branch — are willing to accept an openly homosexual Bishop or recognize same-sex unions.

That was made clear in July when the Rev. Jeffrey John, who was tapped by Bishop of Oxford Richard Harries to become Bishop of Reading in the diocese of Oxford, announced he would remove himself from consideration to stave off talk of a split in the Church of England.

John had been in a long-term homosexual relationship, but said he had been celibate for many years. Despite his promise to uphold church policy on sexuality, the furor over his nomination was intense. He did what was right for the Church by stepping aside.

Wishful Thinking

Many conservatives in the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion expressed hope Robinson would do the same. It appears, however, those hopes will go unfulfilled. Robinson has vowed to accept his enthronement Nov. 2 as planned.

Following an emergency meeting in London, 37 of the world's Anglican archbishops released a statement on Oct. 16 saying Robinson's consecration "will tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level." Many of the world's Anglican provinces will not recognize his ministry or the 2.3 million-member Episcopal Church.

That his consecration might force the hand of conservative Anglicans worldwide is of no consequence. In fact, Robinson told The Washington Times, that is a cross he refuses to bear.

"I will bear the responsibility for trying to discern God's call and following it, but we are not in control of whether people chose to leave or not to leave," Robinson said in an article published Oct. 24. "If they choose to do that, that is their choice. I can shoulder a lot of responsibility, but I can't shoulder all the responsibility for everyone staying in the Anglican Communion."

An Eye Opener

These events are enlightening because I was unaware how liberally some believers interpret God's Word. My walk with the Lord has been short so far, just five years, and I have only had one church I've called home, but I did not know there was so much wiggle room in Scripture.

Call me conservative (please) but I thought the Bible was pretty clear on how God views homosexual behavior:

"‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.'" (Lev. 18:22)

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Cor. 6:9-10)

Granted, Paul lumps "homosexual offenders" with people who could very well be our coworkers or next-door neighbors, but the fact is — at least at my Southern Baptist church — God isn't going to tolerate such behavior.

This isn't a matter of being a little confused about what God meant. It's a matter of manipulating God's Word to fit a world view.

Revisionist Thinking

Frank Griswold, the current presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, USA, backs Robinson's consecration. In a letter to fellow Anglican leaders, Griswold acknowledged there would be a difference of opinion.

"I am keenly aware that for many of you this is clearly contrary to a plain reading of Scripture, and in the contexts in which you live, it is unthinkable," he wrote.

A "plain reading" of Scripture? As opposed to what? A "what He really meant was …" reading?

"A church unable to make room for difference in how Scripture is understood and how Christ's work of reconciliation is to be carried out," Griswold also wrote, "could be in danger of neglecting the continuing unfolding of God's truth worked among us by the Holy Spirit."

Dr. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., in a Crosswalk.com Web log, cautions against that kind of thinking.

"We are witnessing a moral revolution without parallel in Christian history," he wrote, "and this revolution is propelled by radical revisionists who are determined to recast Christianity into something very different from the faith of the Apostles — a church that humbles itself to the authority of modern political correctness rather than the Word of God."

Clergy Divided

Indeed, Griswold is not the only cleric who apparently finds nothing sinful in homosexual behavior.

A national survey conducted after the U.S. Supreme struck down Texas' law that prohibited homosexual sodomy, showed that mainline Protestant clergy are sharply divided over whether homosexuality is sinful.

According to the Ellison Research report, 48 percent of the ministers from mainline churches — Presbyterians, United Methodists and Episcopalians — said homosexuality was not sinful because it was genetic. Fifty-two percent regarded it a matter of choice and thus sinful.

Same-sex marriages are being performed in Canada and recent news reports indicate the national church of Sweden is ready to follow suit. Should we be surprised by these developments?

"Liberal Christianity has been in open revolt against the Word of God for generations now, arguing that times change, so truth must change as well," writes Mohler. "Morality is mere custom, and we must ‘grow' beyond the antiquated morality of the Bible."

He maintains the authority of the Bible is bargained away by clever arguments and then openly dismissed as hopelessly out of date.

"The virtue of authentic Christian compassion is exchanged for the voice of modern ‘tolerance,'" he writes. "Love, in this case, means never having to say you're a sinner."

For Griswold, it means never having to say you are accountable.

"How we have been shaped and formed as Christians and the context in which we live have a great deal to do with how we interpret various passages in the Bible and the weight we give them in making moral decisions," he wrote to his fellow Anglicans.

I praise God my children aren't growing up in his church.