News

Presiding Bishop Michael Curry to preach at royal wedding ceremony

Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Michael Curry waves at the conclusion of his installation service on Nov. 1, 2015 at Washington National Cathedral. Religion News Service photo by Adelle M. Banks

LONDON (AP) — Kensington Palace says the head of the Episcopal Church, the Most Rev. Michael Bruce Curry, will speak at the wedding of Prince Harry and American actress Meghan Markle.

Curry will give the address — a sermon — at the May 19 event in Windsor. He will join the dean of Windsor, the Rt. Rev. David Conner, and the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, who will officiate at the service.

Welby has baptized Markle ahead of her marriage to Harry, the grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, who is the supreme governor of the Church of England.

Curry is the first African-American to have served as presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, an offshoot of the Church of England in the United States. It is part of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

He was installed in 2015 after serving as bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina for 15 years. Curry has long supported LGBTQ rights and was among the first group of bishops to allow same-sex marriages to be performed in the N.C. diocese.

About the author

The Associated Press

149 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • So the Royal Couple wanted a pastor who endorses immorality to marry them? What, is she really a man?

  • Keep it coming Sandi – your inability to constrain your bigotry by rational thought is a wonderful antidote to Christianity.

  • You are mistaken – I’m not preaching Christ – merely supporting your bizarre attempts to expose the horrible misuse of his teaching that religion has created.

    Though, on reflection, had he and I been around at the same time we might have had more in common than you and he.

  • I suspect that I’m not alone is finding it often difficult to follow the reasoning behind your posts here – but this seems so irrational that I’m forced to ask you to explain it.

    Can you?

  • An excellent choice! Given all the race-baiting that’s going on in the world these days, the symbolism inherent in the union of Prince Harry and Megan Markle is wonderfully refreshing. Having Bishop Curry preach is icing on the cake. It is a reminder that love conquers all, despite the many obstacles that narrow-minded bigots and naysayers put in the way. Mozel tov to them both.

  • It takes more effort to reject Christ – Who has made Himself apparent to all – than it does to receive love and life from Him.

  • I read this as a courtesy nod to the Episcopal Church (United States) on the part of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who functions as the spiritual head of the Communion. No church claims membership in the Anglican Communion without being in communion with him. Since Meghan Markle is an American, and has an African-American mother, there is symbolism in the gesture.

    The Anglican Primates publicly sanctioned the Episcopal Church for a period of three years in 2016, stating that it “no longer represent us on ecumenical and interfaith bodies, should not be appointed or elected to an internal standing committee and that while participating in the internal bodies of the Anglican Communion, they will not take part in decision making on any issues pertaining to doctrine or polity.” This was a result of the Episcopal Church’s July, 2015, approval of same-sex marriage rites.

    https://www.episcopalnewsservice.org/2016/01/14/majority-of-primates-call-for-temporary-episcopal-church-sanctions/

    Curry, of course, reiterated his support for same sex marriage – as you point out.

    So, it is an odd situation in some ways.

  • I assume you won’t – but tell me – in what ways do you think that “Christ – …. has made Himself apparent to all “?

  • Understood Bob. It just troubles me greatly.
    I wish I could open your link but my hubby doesn’t want me to do such,.
    “Curry said they decided to support same-sex marriage not because they want to become more popular. What they ultimately want is to make everyone feel welcome in their church.
    “Our commitment to be an inclusive church is not based on a social theory or capitulation to the ways of the culture, but on our belief that the outstretched arms of Jesus on the cross are a sign of the very love of God reaching out to us all,” Curry said.”
    https://www.christiantoday.com/article/u-s-episcopal-churchs-michael-curry-not-backing-down-from-gay-marriage-support/77186.htm
    As I’m sure you know, Christ came and died and rose from the dead to prove we could be freed from sin, and that assembly is endorsing people remain in their sin- breaking bread – a celebration of what Christ endured – with people who show no respect for what He did. That, is an abomination.

    Their commitment is to the world, not Christ. Even Justin has declared that he doesn’t know where he stands on the issue. http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/archbishop-of-canterbury-queens-death-gay-sex

    Homosexuality is clearly condemned in the Bible as is same sex marriage. I have no respect for the man and question his being led by the Holy Spirit at a time such as this where people are going to Hell because of the sin. Sad. He doesn’t have enough love for them to help them go to Heaven.

  • flowers, trees, how our heart works, how our lungs work – the intricacies of all that. It is not done by chance.
    We all know that Christ exists – some just deny it.

  • Random mutation moderated by reproductive success.

    Learn (properly learn) about the scientific theory of evolution and the overwhelming evidence upon which it is based.
    – – – – – – – –
    “We all know that Christ exists – some just deny it.”
    Sandi – that is pathetic.
    It’s not only untrue – it’s also irrational.
    Does pretending that we actually know what you (erroneously) think you know make it somehow easier for you to cling to that which, if you can stand back a bit, you must realise is at least questionable?

  • “Random mutation moderated by reproductive success.” baloney.
    If “random mutation” were true, there would be no homosexuals.
    We all know Christ exists – some just deny it

  • 1 – random mutation is not deniable – we have the evidence and it’s irrefutable.

    2 – how can you imagine that homosexuality refutes random mutation? Without mutation everyone would be the same – it’s called cloning. It’s not that you don’t understand evolution – you have it exactly the wrong way around.

    3 – random mutation is why things are different – including peoples’ sexuality. If you look at family trees it is clear that male homosexuality is present in some families and not in others – and that the genetic variations which make male homosexuality more likely are transmitted via the mother – the evolutionary benefit being that the females who carry the same variations are more fecund [have more children] than those who don’t.

    – – – – – –

    “We all know Christ exists – some just deny it”

    This is desperate – nothing untrue becomes true because it is repeated.

    Why is it so important to you that something so daft is true?

    I’m prepared to grant you that it is quite possible (but actually unknowable) that a man known as Jesus of Nazareth lived around 2000 years ago. Beyond that, all the “Christ” stuff, the all-man-all-god bit, the resurrection and ongoing life is not only unknowable but incapable of being known – that’s why it’s called “faith” –
    Hebrews 11.1 – “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” I get that you hope for things – hoping does not affect reality.

  • You made several.

    They are all both counter to the evidence and clearly irrational.

    Yet you persist – why?

  • Such happy news! I absolutely adore Presiding Bishop Curry. He is a godly, good man of God and a lovely individual who values each person in the very real and abiding love of Christ. Many congratulations to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle!

  • You have a different opinion and interpretation, but by no means are you the arbiter of such to other Christians. You misrepresent our Presiding Bishop greatly with your false and rather ignorant accusations.

    Feel free to attend elsewhere if you don’t agree.

  • Not by you, sadly. You’ve mistaken your own opinion for the truth of the Good News of Jesus. I pray that God will soften your heart, Sandi.

  • Sandimonious, as usual, you are dead Wrong.

    First, not all people are 1p0% gay. Second, Just because we’re gay, doesn’t mean we don’t reproduce. In fact, your atttiudes just make sure that we do.

  • You gotta know the “God Hates Fags!” bitch of RNS. She’s infamous for her hateful comments on here.

  • ISTM that she is unable to apply rational thought to her belief system.

    The aim is not to change Sandi – she seems incapable of self examination – it is to let others see for themselves the desperate consequences that can occur when someone tries to align superstition with reality.

  • Not me then. I’d love to see you saved from the prison of your superstitious belief.

    Oh – you mean saved so that we can spend eternity worshipping a psychopath? Why would anyone want to encourage permanent submission to a dysfunctional deity?

  • A waste of time and money on all fronts and all for the tourists’ dollars.

  • Which begs the question: why? All the straight people I know couldn’t care less.

  • I am saved and that is one of the things I pray for, for you. You can be as angry with Christ as you want, but that will change when you meet Him

  • Not that any one here cares; or even the bride, the groom, the priest and the guests……………being an “adulterer” is just not a big deal any longer.

    “……….So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.” Romans 7:2-3

  • I’ve seen her hateful comments directed at LGBT over on another channel.

    Anytime I see someone that rabidly anti-gay, I suspect that there’s something deeper that *she* is dealing with herself, but denying…

  • IKR? Yep — I don’t care what straight people do in their intimate moments, but the religious Fundies seem to get all spun up *imagining* what gay people do…!

    Here’s what I do:
    Fix dinner, do laundry, shop for groceries, walk the dog, complete my work, read books and garden.
    (It’s a pretty insidious “Gay Agenda”>/i> 😉

  • James Hewitt’s bastard marries his Hollywood floozy and they want to have a homomarriage ceremony? Some honor. Just another reason to thank God the Episcopalian Church is dying.

  • You have convinced yourself, or someone else has done it for you, that
    a) you need to be “saved”
    b) there is something you can do to ensure that you are “saved”, and
    c) you have done whatever it is and are therefore (irrevocably?) “saved”.

    Unfortunately there is no evidence or rational thought process to validate a), b) or c).

    You believe you are “saved” – that is all you can possibly do.

    – – – – – – –

    “angry with Christ” – silly
    I’m not angry with Jesus of Nazareth any more than I’m angry with, Hitler, Stalin, The Prophet Mohammed or my mother. Same reason in each case – they’re dead. Might be angry about some of the things they did but there’s absolutely no angry-with-them. It’s an further irrational fiction that you are unable to let go.

    And why would anyone want to be “saved” – locked in eternity with all the “saved” bigots is not Heaven.

  • We sang a hymn tonight and I thought of you Give. When I find it, I’ll post it for you

  • Unless was is Jabba the Trump, in which case, no one cares about him being an adulterer. Besides, Jesus has forgiven him.

    though bill? can we talk about bill?

  • Always nice to hear Christians judging away at others and wishing them harm.

    So warm and fuzzy.

  • The wedding will cost the Royal Family 2£ million, but the security will cost the State 30£ million. The UK should easily make that up many times over in US tourists alone in the next 6 months.

  • The Archbishop of Canterbury is officiating the marriage ceremony, which will be an Anglican rite. The US Presiding Bishop is only preaching the sermon.

  • It’s a very odd situation for you because of all you think that you know, especially when things occur that rattle your absoluteness that you understand and are correct.

  • First, racial prejudice has receded. The celebrant and the bride are both of African descent and virtually no-one turns a hair.

    Secondly, the ban on remarriage after divorce has been overturned. In 1936 it led to the abdication of the king .In 1955, it stopped Princess Margaret from marrying Group Captain Peter Townsend. However, two of the Queen’s four children have divorced and remarried and Prince Harry is now marrying a divorcee.

    It’s the same with several Presidents of the United States. Presidents Ford, Reagan and Trump either married a divorcee or have remarried after divorce and President Obama was of mixed African and European heritage.

    And guess what: the sky hasn’t fallen, and despite the barking of a few stray dogs, the show goes on without a pause.

  • You will have to dig very deep to find an active research neuroscientist who thinks we have “free will”.

    “We do what we will but we can’t will what we will.”

  • I understand your perplexity at finding a poster that you thought you knew rattle your absoluteness that you understand and are correct by accurately reporting and fairly assessing the development.

  • Which comments lead to “false and rather ignorant accusations”?

    She appears to have well-cited her few pithy observations.

  • As someone who remembers the tumultuous marriages of Prince Charles and Prince Andrew, it seems like the marriages of this generation have an entirely different feel. The couples seem to like each other more, the wives seem more mature and my prediction is that throwing out the old rules will actually make the marriages more stable.

  • …….finally, we agree on something.

    But many people follow this kind of royal family “fairy tale” drama. No shortage of media interest. Even the Lifetime Channel put up an oatmeal “Harry & Meghan” movie. Make a little royal advertiser $$$$.

  • Actually, it does work Arb. It’s my guess that is why they are afraid of it. If people can walk away from homosexuality, and they do every day, then the platform of lies they build their ‘case’ on is shown to be a lie. If people walk away from the sin, they lose their political power.
    Any Christian (and Jew) knows that homosexuality is only a sin. Paul made that quite clear in Romans 1 – it is not innate, it is a choice, and it is not immutable.
    1 Corinthians 6:9-11 – Please pay special attention to verse 11:

    1 Corinthians 6:9-11English Standard Version (ESV)
    9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”

    These groups prove their platform a lie:

    https://www.facebook.com/Ex-LGBT-Through-Jesus-Christ…/

    http://www.homosexuals-anonymous.com/about

    http://www.recmin.org/restored-hope-network/

    http://www.sexchangeregret.com

  • A prod by Harry and Meghan to the Church of England that it should stop arguing endlessly and often nastily about performing gay marriages? and just get on with it. Bishop Curry is primarily a deeply religious man who always preaches the way of Jesus but he also, in his devotion to Jesus and the Gospels, believes in the God-given equal dighity and rights of all human beings. The Church of England is having a nasty row domestically and within the worldwide Anglican communion over gay marriage. In fact Welby rebuked the US Anglican branch (Curry is now the head) for “rushing ahead” of the rest of the Anglican Communion on the issue of gay marriage. Bishop Curry, when a diocesan bishop, was one of the first to allow gay marriage … There other, more official reasons, for including Curry, the main one being that Merkle is an American. But …

  • The ridiculous rule that was held against Charles that he not only marry an undivorced woman but also a virgin led to a ridiculous pick for his bride. Dinana’s being picked for this unsuitable marriage was manipulated by her father and her brother-in-law to boost the Spencer family “prestige.” No woman should be auctioned off as a prized trophy wife. Diana was neurotic but she was also a much wronged woman.

  • Thank God some real Christians, like yourself, exhibit the fruits of the Holy Spirit, contempt and sarcasm being two of them as listed by Paul and Isaiah.

  • 2 Timothy 4 – English Standard Version

    1 I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: 2preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. 3For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.

  • There was a bit more to it than that. Charles had a very bad habit of dating very unduitable women when he was a relatively young man. Betty Windsor was not going to have any of that for the future king of England, much as Victoria didn’t want her son Edward doing much the same thing.

  • But Ben has already conceded that “not everyone is 100 percent gay.” So he has already admitted that psychology-based “conversion therapy” could work effectively in some cases (as has already been proved by Dr. Joseph Nicolosi.)

  • That’s not what he’s saying at all. He is saying that some people are bisexual. That has nothing to do with conversion therapy, which, as I have stated many times, and has been proven many times by the patients themselves, is basically cognitive behavioral therapy. It may change someone’s identity or how they see themselves, but it has nothing to do with changing their actual sexual orientation.

  • I don’t know how things could get much better for me, unless people like you just disappeared. Can Jesus help us with that?

  • No. We’ll stay around on the chance that you decide you want a relationship with Christ and want to go to Heaven

  • We know you are not. Jesus died for me and rose from the grave to prove He can overcome death for me. I wish the same for you

  • So you can be blessed by God and spend eternity with Him. He did come for you initially.

  • The celebrant will be the Archbishop of Canterbury (who is not of recent African descent), not Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, who will give a sermon.

  • Have you ever heard of bisexuals? Nicolosi has been thoroughly discredited by every legitimate association of medical and psychological professionals. And thank God that hateful loser is DEAD.

  • What is “sexual orientation” other than “someone’s identity or how they see themselves”?

  • It means that someone, like the man from the Orlando nightclub shooting that no longer considers himself gay, is still attracted to men, by his own admission. The fact that he doesn’t identify as gay doesn’t change that.

  • If he is still attracted to men by his own admission, you must be using “identify as gay” in a special meaning.

  • There’s no special meaning. Identify as gay means identify as gay, and it’s him, not me, that we’re talking about. His identity may have changed, his sexual orientation has not.

  • It might be helpful if you looked up the use those phrases, which you believe mean something altogether different, and see how they’re used in psychology.

    Here are a few summaries that might provide ideas:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-concept

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_%28social_science%29

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_formation

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/science-choice/201412/basics-identity

    You appear to be using one to mean something external, the other something internal, and I don’t think that’s precisely how they’re defined.

  • I know, I know. Whenever a man or woman reports they are no longer gay, the gay activists immediately screech “Bisexual!” at them, just like they tried to do with the ex-lesbian wife of NYC’s mayor. (She don’t want another woman, she want what Bill got!!).

    Dr. Nicolosi is dead, but he is far FAR from discredited. He successfully helped many people, and his book “Healing Homosexuality” gives 7 case studies that worked plus a contrasting unsuccessful case study to show some limitations.

  • Like I said to Canis, some activists are using a tactic here. Blindly, thoughtlessly calling people “bisexuals” just because they self-report they’re no longer gay.

    Meanwhile, the science of psychology is not an automatic enemy of Christianity. Masters & Johnson wrote that it was possible for “highly motivated” people to experience sexual orientation change. Jesus is a pretty good Motivator, all by Himself.

  • As usual, BS and lies from you. Nicolosi’s “conversion therapy” is banned from practice by licensed professionals and is actually illegal in some states. There is no scientific data that supports the efficacy of such “treatment”, but there is plenty of anecdotal evidence by those who underwent such “therapy” who claim it harmed them. When you try to “repair” something that isn’t broken to begin with, there are problems. Nicolosi was motivated by religion above all else.

  • I’m not the one here claiming to know others’ eternal salvation, as if they sit at the right hand of God.

  • You’re the one who wrote “I wish you would learn some humility and respect.”

    And I wish the same for you.

  • Odd – you’re the one who shows up every time the conversation heads in that direction.

  • It is not the professional practice for licensed therapists according to the APA, the AMA and other professional organizations. It is not banned in most states, but that doesn’t mean it’s a legitimate form of therapy for ethical practitioners. It’s usually religious nutcases who engage in the practice, and don’t disclose it. That was the case in Minnesota with Michele Bachmann’s husband’s clinic. He’s not even licensed as a therapist, but he directed his staff — religious types — to offer reparative therapy. When this was exposed, they vehemently denied it.

  • I assume by the APA you mean either the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association. The American Planning Association seems unlikely.

    Although I see numerous allegations that it is junk science (quite amusing coming from the American Psychiatric Association), there appear to be zero official statements from either APA or AMA condemning or forbidding the therapy.

    The primary negative articles come from publications such as “Angles: The Policy Journal of the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies” and “Journal of Gay & Lesbian Psychotherapy”, hardly paragons of disinterest.

    The Australian Psychological Association issued a statement opposing reparative therapy, but apparently on political rather than scientific grounds; at least it provided no scientific basis for its position.

    The American Psychiatric Association is the source of the standard “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders”.

    It moved homosexuality around the disorders through a number of editions before sending it away altogether in version 5. Now there’s real science.

  • Jesus is dead, dead, dead. For more than 2000 years — if he ever existed to begin with. Jesus cannot motivate anyone except disturbed and delusional people.

  • “Sin” is your hateful opinion. And there is no evidence for your claim. You’re a liar, to the core. Your religion is a lie. Your beliefs are a lie. Your soul is a lie.

  • What science is psychology itself based on?

    My particular question dealt with your claims of professional and legal censure, which as your response demonstrates appears to be …. less than accurate.

  • Psychology is based on the science of brain chemistry. It is akin to medical malpractice for licensed therapists to practice “reparative therapy”.

  • Sexual orientation is not my identity; it is my *orientation*; it is how I am wired. Basic self-awareness allows me to confirm that.

  • The terms “identity” and “orientation” are being bandied about as though everyone agreed on what they mean.

    It is time to define terms. Here’s something I posted yesterday to start that conversation:

    “It might be helpful if you looked up the use those phrases, which you believe mean something altogether different, and see how they’re used in psychology.”

    “Here are a few summaries that might provide ideas:”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-concept

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_%28social_science%29

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_formation

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/science-choice/201412/basics-identity

    “You appear to be using one to mean something external, the other something internal, and I don’t think that’s precisely how they’re defined.”

  • No, psychology is not based on a “science of brain chemistry”.

    The major schools of psychology – some of whom have diametrically opposed foundational tenets – are all based on observational data.

  • Because I’m a Christian gay woman and yes, I *will* speak out against bigotry directed at LGBT people, thank you.

  • I have no problem at all with that, but given your position I do have a problem with:

    “You are SO hung up on gay people…
    SMH”

    which seems to indicate you believe only gay people have a say in the discussion.

  • No, Bob… You just haven’t been here long enough to know the history between Sandi and me.

    Every. Single. Thread. she’s on, no matter the topic, she will find a way to worm in hateful statements about gay people. Every. Single. Time.

    And I’m calling her on that.

  • This isn’t your forum, your discussion, or your anything other than your opinion, which both you and she are entitled to express.

    I reread it.

    My criticism stands.

  • Fine. And it’s not your forum either. Move along, Constable… Nothing to see here.

  • Right – but then I did not object to someone simply posting.

    You did.

    Question: if you use the Disqus block function, you never see her posts at all.

    Why are not doing that?

  • Christ said everything about homosexuality He is the Word of God.

    Leviticus 18:22 – 22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.

    Leviticus 20:13 – If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

    Then, He turned around and died for them should they turn to Him, rebuke their sin and follow Him

  • That’s a simplistic, rigid point of view. Psychology (noun): the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behavior in a given context. In 2018, this would take into account the science of brain chemistry, inextricably linked to the mind. We know, for example that addiction changes brain chemistry.

  • I don’t care what you have to say about this, “Bob”. You’re motivated by one reality only: your bias and prejudice.

  • The person of “Christ” was not present in the writings of the OT. According to your cult, “Christ” is a person who lived thousands of years after those verses were written. As I said, Christ said nothing about homosexuality. Not that I care, but at least you should get the facts straight. So… if this is what you believe… then put me to death, hypocrite.

  • You do know that Christ is God, Canis? I explained why Christ does not put you to death. He gives one until they die to turn to Him

  • I don’t care what you have to say about much of anything, Canis, expect when querying your post leads to insights for people less biased and prejudiced than yourself.

    Of course you’ll avoid the question you were asked.

  • Being a gay man for 60 years, I know more about this than you. Why do so many alleged “straight” people think they know so much about people like me? Arrogant, condescending losers!

  • The science of brain chemistry is NOT the basis of modern psychology.

    Freud wouldn’t have known a covalent bond from an electron pair, nor would have Carl Jung.

  • Hmm, then “God” was wrong in Leviticus. No such words are spoken by Christ in the NT. And you know it.

  • Well, that certainly explains why you can’t answer simple questions or define terms.

    You’re defining your terms as you go to suit yourself.

  • Christ spoke them in the OT also.
    Genesis 1:26 – English Standard Version
    Then God said, “Let us make man in our image…”

  • If you’re trying to argue that psychological research in 2018 ignores brain chemistry as irrelevant, you’re full of shite.

  • Since you have not supported ONE thing you’ve written since two days ago with an actual fact, citation, or other evidence, I think it’s fair to conclude that you’re full of shit.

    I do note that you’ve narrowed “psychology” down to “psychological research in 2018”, one assumes in an effort to find some assertion you can make with at least a scintilla of evidence.

  • My life is not full of shit. My life speaks for itself. A happy marriage of 32 years. A son, and grandchildren who love us. Go fk yourself “Bob”.

ADVERTISEMENTs