Follow usTwitterFacebook


11 Sep 2014 Vatican Comments (1)

Pope 'deeply saddened' by brutal killing of missionary nuns

Vatican City, Sep 11, 2014 / 02:05 am .- Pope Francis has expressed his condolences following the brutal murder of three Italian nuns in Burundi over the weeken…

Read more

12 Aug 2016 News Comments (1)

Martin Luther was a ‘teacher of the faith’, say German bishops

In a new report Germany's bishops say the 500th anniversary of the Reformation must involve repentance on both sides Germany’s Catholic bishops have praised Ma…

Read more

02 Nov 2014 Articles No comments

How to Make the Case for Marriage

Whether we like it or not, secularism is the dominant mode of public discourse today. Even those we encounter who are not "anti-faith" often place a high value …

Read more

30 Sep 2015 News USA No comments

What's it like to play for the Pope? Here's how one Catholic artist described it

Performing for Pope Francis at Saturday’s Festival of Families in Philadelphia was an answer to prayer for musician Marie Miller, but getting a personal thumbs-…

Read more

15 Nov 2014 Q&A Comments (18)

Without an annulment, is it OK to date as long as we are chaste?

Full Question My husband and I married in the Catholic Church, but now I am separated from my husband and in the process of divorce and annulment. Priests …

Read more

13 Dec 2014 Q&A Comments (1)

Are people who die while excommunicated damned?

Full Question What happens to those who die while excommunicated? Do they go to hell? Answer Excommunication of laypeople principally means that …

Read more

10 Sep 2014 Vatican No comments

Church educates through actions; not 'theoretical' lectures

Vatican City, Sep 10, 2014 / 04:44 am .- During his general audience Pope Francis continued to reflect on the Church as mother, explaining that she teaches us b…

Read more

16 Jun 2015 Articles Resources Comments (1)

Thomas Merton, Lent, and the Perils of Avoiding Suffering

We spend one day a week not eating meat, and on a few days we skip meals altogether. We voluntarily deprive ourselves of good things. We intentionally pon…

Read more

22 Jan 2016 News USA Comments (1)

Custom made car Pope Francis used during his visit to Philadelphia up for auction

Archbishop Charles Chaput of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia has announced that the Popes’ Fiat 500L ride that he used during his visit in September to Philadel…

Read more
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

The Slippery Slope of Sexual Sin

The issue of gay bishops and gay unions dominated the news and concerns of our Anglican brethren in 2003. As a Roman Catholic and convert from Anglicanism (of the evangelical variety), I have found that the issue of homosexuality must be placed in a wider moral context. Sexual sin is serious, whether homosexual or heterosexual.

For instance, in 2002 the Church of England officially threw out its belief in the indissolubility of Christian marriage, a belief that had forced King Edward VIII to abdicate the throne sixty years ago and Princess Margaret to give up the man she loved forty years ago. This change on marriage hardly raised a protest from Anglicans. Even the conservative Anglo-Catholics made little of the change; indeed, they have been virtually silent on the gay issue, as it is a problem that riddles their own constituency.

Despite the divorce of Henry VIII, which gave rise to the Church of England, remarriage after divorce had been forbidden by the canon law of the Church of England. (An excellent recent study of the Anglican witness to the indissolubility of marriage, The Great Divorce Controversy, has been written by Edward Williams—no relation—a concerned Anglican who holds to the traditional and biblical view.)

As I write, I have before me two books written by clerical members of a conservative Anglican lobby group called Reform. In Church and State in the New Millennium, Rev. David Holloway asserts that the New Testament teaches that marriage is an indissoluble union and remarriage after divorce is adultery. He asserts that this is biblical and traditional Church of England teaching.

The other book, The Hundred Top Questions, is by Rev. Richard Bewes, rector of All Souls, Langham Place (John Stott’s old church), who asserts that marriage can be dissolved in the case of adultery, in which case the innocent party may remarry. Yet both of these men affirm that the Bible is clear on all the fundamentals.

What, I ask, can be more fundamental than the holy bond that joins man and woman? Anglicans have no consensus as to what constitutes the sin of adultery, a sin so serious that, according to the Bible, it can just as much exclude one from heaven as can homosexual sex (cf. 1 Cor. 6:9). Although Reform makes statements affirming “lifelong heterosexual marriage,” nowhere does the movement officially define whether or not marriage is an indissoluble bond. Members of the movement are hopelessly divided. They have never broken ranks over the difference, since it would make a mockery of their stand against the homosexual lobby and their claim that the Bible is clear on morality.

Anglicans within Reform have concealed their differences and have made common cause on the gay issue. The resolution drafted by the 1998 Lambeth Conference, a worldwide gathering of Anglican bishops, states the following:

“This conference, while rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture, calls on all our people to minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn irrational fear of homosexuals, violence within marriage and any trivialization and commercialization of sex; [and] cannot advise the legitimizing or blessing of same-sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same-gender unions” (Resolution I.10 d, e).

Bishops who do not sign up to this resolution are to be ostracized and boycotted. Witness what happened in the Worcester diocese when Fr. Charles Raven and his congregation left the Church of England, or the boycott of the bishop of Newcastle by conservative Anglicans. Yet these same conservatives hold up Archbishop Peter Jensen of Sydney, Australia, as the very model of a Reformed Anglican bishop—and yet he asserts that Christian marriage is not indissoluble and believes in divorce.

While some Anglicans were denouncing the current Prince of Wales’s adulterous relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles, fellow Anglican Lord George Carey (archbishop of Canterbury, 1990–2002) was telling Prince Charles not to leave his mistress but to marry her. He also sent his congratulations to Bishop Mark Santer, who, while bishop of Birmingham, married the divorced wife of one of his clergymen in a registry office. No reference at the time was made to Paul’s admonition that a bishop must have a blameless family life, in sharp contrast to the barrage against V. Gene Robinson, the openly homosexual bishop at the center of the 2003 Anglican furor.

Conservative Anglicans always are pushing the Lambeth declaration of 1998, which, “in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union” (Resolution I.10 b). Note the careful wording of this statement: There is no mention of indissolubility, since the Anglican communion is divided over the issue of divorce.

There are some provinces of the communion (which in reality is not a communion but a federation) that still hold true to the traditional teaching, while others have long abandoned it. The American Episcopal Church did so as early as 1808. There may be only one openly gay Anglican bishop, but there are dozens of divorced and remarried ones of both sexes.

But Lambeth declarations, besides having no binding authority, can be superseded and contradicted. For instance, take Lambeth 1948, which condemned female ordination, and Lambeth 1908, where contraception was declared to be sinful and a threat to Christian morality. In 1930 that latter declaration was overturned, and contraception was allowed for serious reasons. The Anglican communion became the first major Protestant denomination to give way on this issue. In 1958, even the “serious reasons” proviso was scrapped, and sex became primarily recreational bonding with children as an option.

In 1930, there was much controversy and conservative opposition, and Anglican bishop Charles Gore predicted a sexual revolution as a result. All the nations that have accepted contraception (including nominally Catholic ones) are in sharp decline in both morality and population. In Britain, births are exceeded by deaths in Scotland and Wales. In England, if it weren’t for massive immigration and high fertility among the immigrants, it too would be below replacement levels. So desperate is the British government, with the looming pensions and welfare crisis caused by this population implosion, that the doors are to be opened to limitless immigration.

As for Anglicans, contraception is now a non-issue, or at most a Vatican conspiracy to fill the world with Catholics. Many Anglican books on sex and marriage advocate contraception, masturbation, and oral sex. So ingrained is the contraceptive mentality that few Christians (Catholics included) now want their quiver full of arrows; instead they defer to a “comfortable” lifestyle. Anglicans may assert that Catholics are against the pleasures of the flesh, but it was the sixteenth-century Reformer Thomas Cranmer who took out of the English marriage vows the wifely pledge to “be bonny and buxom in bed and board”! Catholic theology, on the other hand, views the unitive and procreative.aspects of marriage as inseparable.

What the Anglican communion fails to see is that acceptance of contraception by society also opened the door to homosexuality. If sex is primarily for bonding and recreation and can be engineered to be deliberately sterile, how can we deny the legitimacy of the ultimate sterility of same-sex relationships? The late Lord Robert Runcie (archbishop of Canterbury, 1978–1990) cited this fundamental change in the Anglican view of sex in order to justify the fact that he had ordained active homosexuals and lesbians to the Anglican ministry.

In contrast, Catholic teaching on marriage and procreation is biblical and consistent with historical tradition and scriptural teaching. Christ turned marriage into a sacrament that, validly entered into and consummated, only death can put asunder. Furthermore, the sexual union that ensues must be open to the gift of life. Of course, the Bible rules out homosexual sexual practice completely.

Conservative Anglicans are fond of Paul when it comes to doctrines of grace, headship, the role of women in ministry, and homosexuality. After all, he is an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was our Lord who said of his apostles, “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me” (Luke 10:16). But there is one area of Paul that conservative Anglicans are as neglectful of and embarrassed about as the liberals: the teaching in 1 Corinthians 7 that the unmarried state allows for a more dedicated service to God.

Conservative Anglicans need to reexamine their entire teaching about what constitutes human sexual relationships, marriage, divorce, and the family. As our Lord taught, it is easy to criticize the speck in your brother’s eye when you have a log in your own. Surely adultery and the holiness of marriage is as fundamental an issue as homosexuality. With a selective attitude toward sin and Scripture, Anglicans have little chance in converting homosexuals, let alone fulfilling their noble aim of winning the world for Christ.

Robert Ian Williams



  1. Sylver Nyarsuk Reply

    If the whole worldwide becomes homosexuality; who will fill the earth with the gift of God’s continuous creation?

    1. Patrick Gannon Reply

      You really think that could ever happen? Seriously? But if it happened – or something else happened to make us lose fertility, then the animal kingdom would do just fine, or if we take them out with us, the cockroaches will thrive and a million years from now, there will be many new forms of life again. Do you suppose the earth would just disappear if we weren’t here?
      The slippery slope of sexual sin is leading us to extinction. The Church’s opposition, in particular to contraception is sending us over the waterfall without a paddle. We have too many people contending for too few resources, and it’s probably too late to bring it under control without massively catastrophic effects. I know that many Christians look forward to this, as such a disaster, they believe, will usher in the return of Jesus, but what’s going to be ushered in is mankind’s extinction.
      I see a ray of hope on the horizon. I see a horrible virus called Zika that could save us. It could save us by vastly reducing the population rates around the sections of the globe where the population growth is highest and the people, the poorest. The Church loves to create those populations; but when the kids start being born with shrunken heads, and the next generation of Catholics are all dying and brain damaged, there will be a cry against the Church and it’s slippery sexual slope to sin, for it is the Church that commits the sins. It sins in forcing those least able to afford large families to do so under threat of eternal torment, and it sins in condemning the human genome to extinction by doing nothing to address our gravest problem – overpopulation; and it does this for its own selfish interests for power and control and money. But if the Zika thing gets out of hand, they will be seen as monsters for forcing the births of tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands… who knows… of these little shrunken headed Catholics, and they will have to change the policy, or the Vatican will be metaphorically burned to the ground by the civilized world – including “civilized” Catholics. Much as I would never wish such misery on another human, I see the tiniest hope that Zika will be our salvation, and Church doctrines about slippery slopes to sexual sin, will come under intense scrutiny, for it is my opinion, that it is the Church which is disordered.

Leave a Reply

  1. most read post
  2. Most Commented
  3. Choose Categories