The Sin of Pride in the Episcopal Church in L.A.

"In this case, the question is not whether gays should be bishops, but whether their immediate promotion is worth tearing our communion apart. The Los Angeles diocese has essentially answered yes.

It is the answer of radicals, of people so lacking any trace of humility, that they cannot take the time to convince their fellow worshippers but must push forward with that moral certainty which is almost always a prelude to misfortune. One parish priest described their faux-humble, supercilious attitude to me as "Come let us reason together—and then you'll agree with us."

Will we? I don't know. For myself, if the church splits, I neither want to join a communion that defines itself by its opposition to homosexuality nor stay with a group that's been highjacked by radicals now free to override every church tradition. And they have proved by their action that they will. I will probably be forced to find another denomination. I doubt I'll be alone."

In the WSJ from a pro gay relationship guy. Read it all. I disagree with him on many points (such as gay marriage is inevitable etc etc) but that is not his main point.

I suppose this is the underlying issue that irks me also. We see this in many forms in the Catholic Church over the years among certain groups that want to throw everything out!!!

As Chesterton noted:

There is one thing I have never from my youth up been able to understand. I have never been able to understand where people get the idea that democracy was in someway opposed to tradition. It is obvious that tradition is only democracy extended through time. Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. Tradition refuses to submit to a small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. I cannot separate the two ideas of tradition and democracy; it seems evident to me that they are the same idea. We will have the dead at our councils. (G. K. Chesterton, ca, 1900).