Will an Anglican/Epicopalian explain this to me?

[Flaherty]

From Mark 10:10-13

And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

I understand that Henry VIII broke with Rome over the issue of divorce, which Jesus specifically condemns be equating it with adultery.

Today, we have Anglicans and Episcopalians in controversy over the issue of gay bishops. Why? Yes, Paul condemns homosexuality, but if Anglicans are going to ignore a higher authority (Jesus) on the question of divorce, then why be careful to observe what a lesser authority (Paul) says about homosexuality? If a divorced man can still be an Anglican priest or bishop, then why not a gay man?

How is this not hypocrisy?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Well, how has the homosexual ban inconvenienced a monarch?

 

[RamblingOnwards]

Originally posted by Flaherty Anglicans are going to ignore a higher authority (Jesus) on the question of divorce

(I am not an Anglican but...) this seems somewhat of an oversimplification of the Anglican position.

Until recently, a divorced anglican was not permitted to remarry in a church if his/her partner was still living. Even now, the church still counsels against it, but will allow it in exceptional circumstances. Divorce is permissable but unfortunate, remarriage is more strongly discouaged.

The homosexual act was considered to be the same as any other fornication (sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other), which is a bit of a cop-out when you don't allow homosexual marriages, really, but it meant that while actually having sex would require forgiveness, being gay was fine.