Fr. David Handy provokes a thought or two... like, "If the church is supposed to be a rainbow, why is it just lavender?"

In a comment under one of yesterday's posts, Fr. David Handy writes:

... but we have blithely forgotten that usury is a serious sin. Medieval Christendom took it very seriously.

And that gets me thinking, "Why can't The Episcopal Church lock in on real issues that can unite Christians, instead of slobbering over homosexual entitlements all the time?"

Frankly, working against usury would unite very conservative, Biblical Christians and more "liberal" (not an ideal word) people interested in social application of the Gospel.

Then there are the horrific issues on the Indian Reservations, such as the suicide rates among young people on the Rosebud. Again, very traditional Christians are attuned to the spiritual dimension of the problem, and the more liberal church is attuned to the need for funding, counselors and ministry programs that can help meet the need.

But no, The Episcopal Church has adopted the "Lavender Ghetto" as its model for ministry. Exclusive, closed off (except for occassional bouts of exhibitionism), fearful to the point of paranoia, demonizing or ridiculing the "straight world" outside... is there really any difference between TEC and the gay "district" in some gray, anonymous city?