The Most Rev. Bishop Michael Curry, primate of the Episcopal Church, gives an address during the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in St. George's Chapel at Windsor Castle on May 19, 2018. (Owen Humphreys/PA Wire via AP)

Episcopal Bishop Curry gives royal wedding an American flair

WINDSOR, England (AP) — Nothing quite captured the trans-Atlantic nature of Saturday’s royal wedding as much as the guest preacher whose sermon brought American flair to a very English church service.

The Most Rev. Michael Bruce Curry, the first black leader of the Episcopal Church in the United States, was handpicked by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to address their 600 wedding guests.

The bishop’s sermon on the theme of love, delivered with energy and studded with quotes from the Bible, Martin Luther King Jr. and African-American spirituals, was a contrast to the more solemn Anglican style the royal family is used to.

Quoting civil rights icon King on the “redemptive power of love,” Curry told the bride and groom “it’s not just for, and about, a young couple who we rejoice with, it’s more than that.”

Many observers were surprised and delighted. BBC broadcaster Jeremy Vine tweeted: “The preacher is doing 50 in a 30 zone and it’s brilliant.”

Supermodel Naomi Campbell hit Caps Lock and tweeted: “BISHOP MICHAEL CURRY GIVING ME LIFE.”

Curry, who like Markle’s mother has African ancestors who were slaves in the U.S., said that even during their time of bondage, love helped those in captivity persevere.

“When love is the way, we actually treat each other, well, like we are actual family,” he said in a sermon that touched on poverty, inequality and the healing power of love.

“When love is the way, we know that God is the source of us all and we are brothers and sisters, children of God and brothers and sisters,” he said. “That’s a new heaven, a new earth, a new world, a new human family.”

Harry and Markle exchanged a quick glance at one point as Curry drifted from his prepared remarks and ad-libbed. Camilla and Kate — the Duchess of Cornwall and the Duchess of Cambridge — traded sidelong glances.

Queen Elizabeth II, who as monarch holds the title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England, did not show any sign of discomfort and looked as stoic as she had through the entire ceremony.

There may have been a touch of royal relief when Curry quipped “We gotta get y’all married now.” But he kept going, bringing a dash of passion to the pulpit.

The crowds waiting outside for a glimpse of the royal couple loved it. Cheers greeted Curry as he walked uphill from the chapel along the procession route after the service. One man shouted “well done” — prompting a smile and “God bless you” from the bishop.

Former Labour Party leader Ed Miliband, an atheist, tweeted: “Rev Michael Curry could almost make me a believer.”

The Episcopal Church is an offshoot of the Church of England in the United States and has been the spiritual home of many of the American Founding Fathers and U.S. presidents.

Even though the Episcopal Church's support for gay marriage has recently caused friction with the greater Anglican Communion, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said ahead of the ceremony that he was “thrilled” Curry would be speaking there, calling him a “stunning preacher.”

Curry, 65, who is married and has two grown daughters, was born in Chicago and raised in Buffalo, N.Y. He began his ministry in Winston-Salem, N.C., and served as rector in Lincoln Heights, Ohio, and in Baltimore.

Selecting him to give the sermon was one of several personal touches Harry and Meghan put on the service, held in the 15th-century St. George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle.

Markle, who attended a Roman Catholic school, was baptized in March into the Church of England in preparation for the wedding and joining the royal family.

The ceremony was based on Common Worship — the most modern of several Church of England service options — and included prayers and hymns, as well as readings and musical selections chosen by the couple and their families.

That included a fusion of American and British elements, including the London-based gospel ensemble the Kingdom Choir’s stirring renditions of Ben E. King’s “Stand By Me” and Etta James’ “Amen/This Little Light of Mine.”

Teenage cellist Sheku Kanneh-Mason wowed the 600 guests with works including Franz Schubert’s “Ave Maria.” The cellist won the BBC’s Young Musician of the Year contest in 2016, the first black musician to do so.

For all the individual touches, the service was dominated by tradition.

The pair read the Church of England wedding vows, promising to have and to hold, “for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part.”

Then the archbishop pronounced them husband and wife.

“Those whom God has joined together let no one put asunder,” he said.

(Rising reported from Berlin. Jill Lawless in London contributed.)


  1. “The preacher is doing 50 in a 30 zone and it’s brilliant.”

    That’s certainly one way of putting it. Personally I could have done with a lot less verbiage and a lot less theatrics. The length of the sermon was out of proportion to the rest of the ceremony – it was too d*mn long. Why do clergymen everywhere think that their sermon is THE reason people come to church? There’s more to a religious service than that.

    The “American flair” about which this author speaks was really more American in-your-face brashness in this instance, if you ask me. When I visit foreign countries I try to fit in with the locals. Experience has taught me that when you make an effort to do that people are generally more receptive to what you have to say. But we Americans are more known for shoving our way of doing things, including our brash style, down everyone else’s throats, like it or not, with the implication that everyone else will just have to deal with it – even though we’re guests on their soil.

    While the message of Bishop Curry’s sermon was beautiful, I think its undue length and lack of respect for British sobriety in a formal ancient chapel detracted from it and created a stylistic dissonance that was jarring. Why do black clergymen always feel like they have to get all revved up like they’re about to take off? Can’t there be cerebral black preachers as well?

    As for the gospel choir, had they sung any actual gospel music, or anything else that was sacred, like spirituals, I might have been more receptive to their art. A popular song that had nothing to do with God should be been relegated to the reception, like Elton John’s music was. (I felt the same way about Elton John singing at Diana’s funeral, btw.)

    Sorry to rain on everyone’s parade, but that’s how I feel. My favorite part was the excellent cellist whose playing was far more mature than would be expected from a person that young. That is the sort of thing that brings me closer to God – not long-winded clergy people going on way beyond their allotted time.

  2. “Why do black clergymen always feel like they have to get all revved up like they’re about to take off and equate that with passion? Can’t there be cerebral black preachers as well?”

    Now if Donald Trump got caught posting that item, all the PC national media zombies would instantly scream “Racist!”, with lots of fake-news angst.

    This probably explains all those British frowns. Behold, even the fancy Black Liberal Bishop Curry, done messed up his patootie in the pulpit.

    But don’t worry, I ain’t gonna call Black Lives Matter and have their goon squads visit Elagabalus. And no, Elegabalus is NOT racist. There’s other white folks who sincerely (in private) share the same questions about black preaching, worship, and even shouting.

    (You readers know what “shouting” or “getting happy” is, right? Sure you do. Good stuff.)

    So these are just random reflections, no attack, no accusation, no H8. And to answer Mr. E’s question, there’s the late Rev. Gardner Taylor, who I heard long ago. Cerebral, yet NOT boring. See Wikipedia.

  3. For those who do not know…..communion is a celebration for followers of Christ because He went through whipping, being spit upon, assaulted, his beard pulled out, His hands nailed to a cross, His feet nailed to a cross, He took our sins on Him, so that we would not have to die, but could have everlasting life with His Father. He went through this so we don’t have to die for our sins should we accept Him as our Lord and Saviour. That is what the celebration of communion is essentially about.

    The man, “celebrates” communion with people who rebel against Christ and the sacrifice that He went through for anyone/everyone. These people cherish and celebrate their sin and endorse it for others to be bound up in – a mockery of what Christ did and accomplished at the cross. Christians do not observe this blessing lightly and unrepentant sinners are basically ridiculing what Christ did – spitting in the face of God.

    This man, teaches people to embrace their sin – thus leading them to Hell and death – nothing he could do is worthy of praise. He works for satan.

    2 Corinthians 11:14 English Standard Version (ESV)

    14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.

    I would hope, “an American flair” is not going to Hell.

  4. I just don’t get why nearly all the black preachers I’ve heard who come from a non-evangelical background feel like it’s incumbent on them to emulate preachers in the black evangelical tradition, that’s all. And you’re right – I’m not a racist person because my parents raised me not to be – for which I am very grateful. And it sounds like I would enjoy hearing your Rev. Taylor – cerebral but not boring – right up my alley.

  5. AW C’MON. Who is “The Most Rev. Michael Bruce Curry, the first black leader of the Episcopal Church in the United States”, kidding here? Did he actually pronounce Prince Harry and Princess Meghan “husband and wife” with that famously useless and laughable warning-bit at the end? “‘Those whom God has joined together let no one put asunder [THIS TIME AROUND, PLEASE],’ he said” – did he not? I mean, shouldn’t he best have skipped that part of the ceremony? – knowing full well that, as true “American flair” goes:

    “Court documents show that [Meghan] Markle wed [Trevor] Engelson on August 16, 2011. By July 5, 2013, they were separated, and she filed for divorce on August 7 of that year in Los Angeles. Markle cited ‘irreconcilable differences’ as the reason for the split, but by all appearances the breakup was amicable. The couple followed a common celebrity procedure by having a ‘temporary judge’ appointed to rule on their issues outside of the courtroom.”

    THEN AGAIN, WHO CARES. This woman most certainly doesn’t: “Queen Elizabeth II, who as monarch holds the title of SUPREME GOVERNOR OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, did not show any sign of discomfort and looked as stoic as she had through the entire ceremony.”

    Source: Radar, November 1, 2016, “A Royal Mess! Inside ‘Suits’ Star Meghan Markle’s Secret Divorce File”.

  6. It’s my guess that you haven’t ever been to a predominantly Black congregation in a non-evangelical church. The ones I have visited are not all that different from their evangelical counterparts, the preacher included.

    Since Prince Harry’s response to his bride when Bishop Curry finished was, “Wow, that was amazing!” I don’t think that it matters what anyone else’s opinion might be, whether in the room, watching on TV or having just read about it.

    My guess that Bishop Curry as himself, because I can assure you, every time that I have heard him preach his style hasn’t changed, was exactly why Their Royal Highnesses invited him to deliver the sermon during their nuptials.

    As to length, it was just right in my opinion, barely 10 minutes.

  7. Bishop Curry didn’t preside over the marriage, he only preached a sermon. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the highest ranking bishop in the Church of England, was who officiated the marriage in the service.

    What difference does it make about any scandal someone may wish to dredge up about either of them; she was previously married, he was running around buck naked at a wild party in Las Vegas, They are older and wiser people today one hopes and they wish to spend it together.

  8. In this case there was no Communion/Lord’s Supper/Eucharist served during this service. Bishop Curry’s part in the service was strictly a sermon, he preached about love.

  9. He doesn’t know love if he is not following Jesus.

  10. It’s your opinion that he isn’t following Jesus.

    Frankly,i don’t think that you would know Jesus if you passed him on the street.

  11. No. In Christ’s opinion he is not following Him

  12. the service would have been much better if he were a Christian.

  13. Come now sandinwindsor. Michael Curry and all the reference to black people and to Africa was a plea to African Anglican bishops not to leave The Church of England and the Anglican Communion! Imagine giving the sermon in the cathedral at Windsor Castle! The bishops of Africa will stay now, won’t they, because maybe they’ll have world fame some day in such a church. They can put aside now the sins of North American Episcopalians and their sinful sanctifying of marriage and ordination among homosexuals, now, right?

  14. they could have used a Christian still

  15. What’s wrong, then, with my suggestion that the reference to Matthew 19:4-6 should have been scrapped from the wedding ceremony? Why bother pretending to nod heads to when “Christ Jesus said unto them, Have ye not read, that God which made them at the beginning made them male and female, said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. WHAT THEREFORE GOD HATH JOINED TOGETHER, LET NOT MAN PUT ASUNDER.”

  16. Oh, I didn’t see Christ posting in this thread to state his opinion!

  17. I don’t think that those words were said at Meghan’s first wedding. It was a secular affair, a civil marriage, held on a beach.

    She wasn’t a baptized Christian at that time. She received catechism instruction and was just baptized & confirmed this year, a couple of months ago, by the same Archbishop of Canterbury who has now officiated at her marriage to Prince Harry on Saturday.

  18. Christ always agrees with Sand, didn’t you know that? I mean, obviously everything Sand believes must be God’s will–just ask him!

  19. The African Anglican bishops are not in the Church of England.

    Generally Africans in Africa do not identify with African-Americans in my experience.

  20. So what’s wrong, then, with my suggestion that the INSINCERE reference to Matthew 19:4-6 should have been scrapped from the wedding ceremony?

    That’s wrong because “those words [from THE Christ Jesus of Matthew 19:4-6] were [NOT] said at Meghan’s first wedding”?! wwhhaAATTTT?! You mean, THE Christ Jesus of Matthew 19:4-6 had made that special allowance for her? Show me where He did that. You can’t, can you? Now why is that?

  21. Why don’t you say what you really mean, i.e. that he supports gay people and therefore that makes him not a Christian.

    Well here’s something for you to gnaw on: did you hear about what Pope Francis had to say recently to Juan Carlos Cruz, a key whistleblower in Chile’s most famous case of clerical sexual abuse? If not, this ought to entertain you for a while.

    Cruz is gay and this is what Cruz said Pope Francis said to him: “You know Juan Carlos, that does not matter. God made you like this. God loves you like this. The Pope loves you like this and you should love yourself and not worry about what people say.”

    So go ahead, I dare you – come right out and say you don’t think Pope Francis is a Christian. Go ahead – do it right here on these pages, you self-righteous hypocrite!

  22. Before we all go off the rails on what the Holy Father said – the quote referenced above is actually that of Juan Carlos and his recollection of what the Pope said. As we all know – we can hear something and imply something else according to our own situation.
    I am not saying that the Pope did not say this – but I would like to see verification from the Vatican.
    What I took from the story was the Pope again showing compassion, mercy and humility thereby setting the example that we should without condition love one another. In this article, you could replace gay with adulterer, murderer, thief, etc. Christ loves all of us – no matter how we are. That is what the Pope was saying; and that is what we should all do.

  23. NON SEQUITUR. And embarrassing.

    Watch that tongue of yours, please, my sister in Christ Jesus.

    You’re thinking of the “communion” rituals in your Closed/Open Brethren Assemblies. The Anglican Communion is neither The Eucharist nor The Lord’s Supper Table.


    “Today the Anglican Communion is 39 autonomous national and regional Churches plus six Extra Provincial Churches and dioceses; all of which are in Communion – in a reciprocal relationship – with the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is the Communion’s spiritual head. There is no Anglican central authority such as a pope. Each Church makes its own decisions in its own ways, guided by recommendations from the Lambeth Conference, Anglican Consultative Council, the Primates’ Meeting and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Anglicans and Episcopalians have always worked and worshipped together across national borders to support each others’ lives and ministry. The insight, experience and wisdom contributed to joint endeavours by Anglican Communion members from all provinces means that the Communion can pack a real punch at national and international levels. Examples of such collaboration can be found in the Communion’s Networks, in projects such as Anglican Witness, the Anglican Alliance, in its International Commission on Unity, Faith and Order and on the Anglican Communion News Service. It has always been a strength of the Anglican Communion that such co-operation continues and flourishes despite significant disagreements on certain issues. Other Christian traditions look to the Anglican Communion to learn from its ability to have good disagreements. Projects such as Continuing Indaba and Living Reconciliation testify to how reconciliation is at the heart of our Communion.”

    Source: The Anglican Communion Office, Anglican Consultative Council, 2018.

  24. I am not saying that the Pope did not say this – but I would like to see verification from the Vatican.

    That you will never receive. The Vatican has already been asked for comment and replied that they don’t comment on the pope’s private conversations.

    But thanks for the gratuitous insult by comparing the way I love (which is the way the pope says God made me) to adulterers, murderers, and thieves. How very, very Christian of you.

  25. Sandimonious: My god is smaller than your god!

  26. Sandimonious has stated she is not sure that Catholics are Christian, Sandimonious has stated she is not sure if Catholics will burn in hell for not bein* her sort of Christian.

    Sandimonious is only certain that 1) her Jesus is smaller than yours, and 2) jesus is her sock puppet.

  27. No you cannot replace gay with adulterer or murderer. One takes a life. One breaks a sacred oath to the harm of another, or several others. My alleged sin does nothing but offend your god or your church or you.

    You are doing the sin leveling thing again— not to bring your (a generic you) Alleged sins up to mine, but to Bring my imaginary sins down to your level. Sorry. I harm no one. I bother no one, except to insist that my rights as a tax payer, a citizen, and a human being are every bit as important as yours, which seems to bother a whole lot of so called Christians who insist that there are no morals, no understanding of morality, in the universe.

    Gee whiz. Making love to my husband is no different than murdering him. .

  28. ““When love is the way, we actually treat each other, well, like we are actual family,” he said in a sermon that touched on poverty, inequality and the healing power of love.”

    I concur with this statement by the good Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church. I believe his church could parcel out some of that “healing power of love,” by using some money from their considerable resources to teach the poor how to take advantage of the educational opportunities available to them in their communities. A good job is the essential first step for the poor WORKING their way out of poverty. It does no good for the Episcopal Church to underwrite socialist schemes that just spread the poverty down to the working class, the people who are least able to support those worthless and wasteful schemes.

    There’s enough brain power in Bishop Curry’s American church to create some of those training classes, including ones on job interviewing skills, resume writing and telephone etiquette. I’ve helped to lead and teach those classes myself at St. Johns Episcopal Cathedral in downtown Denver, when big layoffs in the mid-to-late 80’s found many of our parishioners out of work and needing a dust-up on those vital skills.

  29. I spent quite a bit of time in the South, and I often visited some of the black churches with their livelier preachers. Regardless of the denomination, it was always a big theatrical production where the volume of the preacher and their rich vocal cadences counted for more than the content of their sermons. In most cases, those preachers were “preaching to the choir,” who had come for a great performance rather than to gain much enlightenment from the pulpit.

    I suspect this was true of the powerful and passionate preaching put forth by the most Rev. Bishop Curry at Prince Harry and Princess Meghan’s wedding. It was intended to be a overblown performance that would dazzle the wedding guests and crowds of TV watchers around the world.

    My 2 cents worth.

  30. The celebration of the Holy Eucharist is for all who will draw near, participate and receive it, regardless of the seriousness of their sins.

    Even the ordained officiant of this celebration is a sinner, whose sins are covered by the wonderful grace of God.

    A true celebration, indeed!

  31. Many of those African bishops have left the worldwide Anglican communion rather than stay in a church they feel has taken an un-biblical stance on same-sex marriage. Some of those bishops have been chose to lead whole dioceses of churches belonging to the American Anglican church. They left the Episcopal Church here in the US because of that un-biblical stance TEC took on same-sex marriage. .

  32. Non repentant sinners do not take communion

  33. we still do not take communion with unrepentant sinners, my brother

  34. God made no one a homosexual. It is a choice and a bad one for someone

  35. You ought to google “christian polygamy in Africa” to see where these same Africans stand on heterosexual sin, especially their own.

  36. No, Sandi always agrees with Christ.

  37. Christ left us 66 books revealing Himself to us David

    Revelation 21:8 ESV
    But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”

  38. you need to do a little more research before commenting Ben. As per usual, you are wrong again.

  39. No dear. I am just quoting you.

  40. You know you said it. I know you said it. I have no intention of going through months of your comments you to prove that you said what we both know you said.

    But thanks once again for proving that all of your talk of morality and jesus is just the candy coating on a passive aggressive little lollipop triple dipped in psycho and a vastly inflated over identit with old.

    You are such a piece of work, dear. Jesus doesn’t like t when you lie.

  41. Yep, that’s the standard excuse. Predictable as ever.

  42. God made no one a sanctimonious prig. It’s a choice and a bad one for someone.

    There, fixed it for you.

  43. Edited from “we don’t take communion with non-repentant sinners”.
    Let’s be accurate.
    Oh, wait! It’s you.

  44. Good to see my comments have an affect on you Ben. Maybe Christ will get through to you before you die

  45. I don’t consider them sanctimonious prigs, but I do consider them unrepentant sinners.

  46. Good. You’re getting to know me

  47. Who knows? maybe he will get through to YOU.

  48. He captured me with his love a long time ago. I still wish the same for you,

  49. An unrepentant sinner is exactly what I consider you for being a sanctimonious prig.

  50. Your alleged sin, kept in private, is one thing.

    Made a law it is another.

  51. Punching “christian polygamy in Africa” into Google got one hit, and that one requires getting logged in to read.

    Removing the quotation marks results in this sort of thing:

    which indicates polygamy is unacceptable but not too uncommon in rural areas, not unlike the experience with Christianity as it moved across Europe.

    which describes Nigeria’s Anglican leader that country’s Christian polygamists to give up their extra wives, and noting that the problem arose from the conversion of polygamous Muslims to Christianity who already had multiple wives.

    In neither case is there an impression left that polygamy is an acceptable Christian practice, or that the expectation is less than those doing knocking it off.

    Just like Christians deal with those with same sex attraction.

  52. Actually she asked you to prove it.

    “You know you said it. I know you said it. I have no intention of going through months of your comments you to prove that you said what we both know you said.” is replay of the same thing you did with me a couple of days.

    No, no one but you knows she said it, and you can’t or won’t prove it.

  53. Most Christian bodies who celebrate communion do not commune with non-repentant sinners.

  54. If you got only one hit, you weren’t paying attention. You can also google Christian polygamy today,

  55. No, you weren’t paying attention.

    I reported exactly what happened:

    Without the quotation marks there are more hits, none of which seem to advance any position you’ve taken.

  56. You personally? Nah. I just recognize your type.

  57. Gosh, I missed the Pope’s message to Mr. Cruz (more accurately, the Pope’s message for everybody via Mr. Cruz). Sincere thanks for quoting it, although you won’t like this response.

    Here’s the God part of his message: “God loves you like this.” “The Pope loves you like this.” Francis got that part right.

    But here’s the Satanic part of his message (no I’m not joking): “God made you like this.” Removing ANY hope from Mr. Cruz that Christ can free him of his gay slavery.

    God is not the author of confusion (1 Cor. 14:33). But folks ARE getting a lot of heavy confusion from this Pope.

    Preaching the opposing religions of Christianity and Universalism at the same time. Preaching that God is love, but also preaching that God is powerless. Hmm.

    Is this Pope a Christian? I honestly don’t know, and Big Media is absolutely refusing to ask him for specifics. This is a bad situation. He’s a gracious, humble, pastoral man who unfortunately IS putting out a lot of rational and spiritual confusion.

  58. The requirement for being in the Anglican Communion is to be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury.

    That means churches with fully Anglican beliefs and liturgies are not in the Anglican Communion while churches with minor Anglican components are in the Anglican Communion.

    If your idea of “good disagreements” is being unable to resolve anything, yes, it does good disagreements.

  59. And there’s the kicker, of course.

    Homosexual? Bisexual? Pansexual? Transsexual? “God made you like this.”

    Adulterer? “God made you like this.” (Remember the Time Magazine cover story, years ago, saying adultery was genetic?)

    Murderer? Thief? Etc?
    “God made you like this.”

    Outcomes: “God loves you like this” is a Biblical winner. “God made you like this” is a Hadean winner.

  60. I’ve read through your comment thread. For an allegedly straight guy you spend an awful lot of time commenting on LGTB-related issues. I do too, but it’s because my life is under attack from people like you, something that’s been the case for all of my nearly six decades on earth. What’s your excuse? It better be a convincing one because otherwise people are going to assume that you’re just another case of “Methinks the lady doth protest too much.”

  61. God & Jesus must be so pleased that, though “[Closed/Open Brethren Christians] still do not take communion with unrepentant sinners”:

    (1) “The Lord’s Supper [tends] to degrade into a free-for-all, where brethren frequently give sermonettes, or even motivational talks”!

    (2) “The people … who had previously loved each other, turned into a pack of snarling wolves. It was a horror show with insults and degradation flying on both sides. Assembly meetings were people glaring at each other across the room and screaming at each other afterward. Families stopped speaking to one another; friends became foes forever”!

    (3) “If you had a teenager in your house who had been raised in the Brethren but was not yet ‘breaking bread,’ i.e. fully compliant, you couldn’t eat with them”!

    Source: (1) Assembly Quest, March 12, 2007, “My history with ‘open brethren'”. (2) Janet Prost, “I survived the Exclusive Brethren”, Stuff, August 31, 2016. (3) Rebecca Stott, “‘I Was Full Of Rage’: Author Rebecca Stott On Growing up in A Christian Cult”, NPR, July 9, 2017.

  62. Take that up with Christ. He grouped ALL those things together in Matt 15:19.

  63. It is a celebration of what Christ did for us on the cross – shed blood, torn flesh

  64. We’re all activists in one area or another, quite honestly.

    In THIS particular forum, we activists get to talk what we talk, share what we share, without getting nervous or doing self-censorship.

    (YOU don’t seem scared to do a lot of postings either, hmm?)

    You know what kind of activist Ben is. You know what kind of activist I am. You know we’re both RNS junkies.
    What about you?

  65. By comparison it’s worse off for eucharistically exclusive Catholics such as yourself, considering that:

    “Intercommunion usually means an agreement between churches by which all members of each church (clergy with clergy, or laity with laity, respectively) may participate in the other’s Eucharistic celebrations or may hold joint celebrations. The Catholic Church in fact has entered into no such agreement. It allows no Eucharistic concelebration by its clergy with clergy of churches not in full communion with it.”

    Source: Wikipedia, “Full Communion”.

  66. YUP: “It is a [HYPOCRITICAL] celebration of what Christ [VAINLY] did for us [HYPOCRITES] on the cross – shed blood, torn flesh”!

    (Idi) Amen to that!

  67. Sorry, not nearly convincing enough,which leaves me to draw obvious conclusions.

  68. I didn’t think you were that lost. Thanks for the update

  69. You’re free to draw any conclusions, of course. But if you put them on the discussion table, be fully prepared to support and defend ’em.

  70. The rules for receiving communion in various denominations vary.

    Generally Catholic, Orthodox, conservative (e.g., Missouri Synod) Lutheran, and other confessional/doctrinal churches do NOT practice intercommunion. These churches constitute the majority of Christians.

    There are some laxer practices:

    Canon I.17.7 of the Episcopal Church in the United States provides that:

    “Eligibility for Communion. Sec. 7. No unbaptized person shall be eligible to receive Holy Communion in this Church.”

    It is often disregarded by rectors who favor “open communion”.

    Since a person who receives unworthily receives to his own condemnation, I fail to see to what advantage this is done.

  71. How “lost”? So “lost” that I had to leave your Closed/Open Brethren Assemblies. You’re still there because you’re NOT “lost”. Good thing the Shepherd is still out there looking for His “lost” sheep. Otherwise, where will you & the rest of the Gospel Hall/Chapel folks be?

  72. You don’t appear to be.

    In fact you’re just short of flaming.

  73. “American flair” – at an English wedding. Why?

  74. Same reason there was a gospel choir – a reflection two different of the backgrounds of both individuals.

  75. I followed up earlier on a similar comment and from what I could find, it is only the C of E that has money – others not apparently in the same financial boat.

  76. DK if you have any other information but Irreconcilable differences was introduced as an option to an otherwise expensive process to avoid costs etc with actually proving other grounds so anything else is an assumption. Besides, the marriage was also civil and she wasn’t baptized – all points that gave Kim Davis a free pass as a heroine to the Right.

  77. Still haven’t found the other passage in Romans referencing unnatural yet have you?

  78. 24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,
    26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

  79. Wrong passage – the other one.

  80. Only closet cases use the word “flaming”.

  81. And He loves me so much He died for me.

  82. Only flamers name themselves after dogs.

  83. There is another one. And 24 doesn’t count so really back to one. Might make you reconsider the meaning of unnatural.

  84. 24 counts. Sexual impurity is not “natural”. Dishonouring one’s body, is not natural

  85. Never heard of her before. (Never mind not getting the point of her relevancy to the INSINCERE reference at Megharry’s wed-O-rama to Matthew 19:4-6 that “those whom God has joined together let no one put asunder [THIS TIME AROUND, PLEASE]”.) You mean THIS Kim Davis?

    (1) “A gay man in eastern Kentucky has lost his bid to challenge Republican county clerk Kim Davis, who went to jail three years ago for denying him and others marriage licenses in the aftermath of an historic U.S. Supreme Court decision. David Ermold sought the Democratic nomination in Tuesday’s primary in Rowan County, Kentucky. His quest to challenge the woman who said ‘God’s authority’ prevented her from giving him a marriage license inspired thousands from at least 48 states to donate more than $200,000 to his campaign. … He and his now-husband were one of several gay couples who tried to get licenses from Davis after the ruling.”

    (2) “Davis [got] divorced in 1994, 2006 and 2008, court records show … She gave birth to twins five months after divorcing her first husband … Their father was identified as her third husband, according to court records”.

    Source: (1) Adam Beam and Dylan Lovan, “Gay Kentucky man loses bid to challenge GOP clerk Kim Davis”, Associated Press, May 22, 2018. (2) Associated Press and Daily Mail, September 1, 2015, “Revealed: Kentucky clerk refusing to issue gay marriage licenses has been married FOUR times and gave birth to twins out of wedlock”.

  86. He didn’t die. He only gave up part of his weekend for your sins.

  87. Yes that Kim Davis whom many Christians including legal defense jumped to her aid. Bit my real point was that I do not know why Ms. Markle’s first marriage ended and I think that is out of the public purview – was it simply that they quit or was there abuse, adultery or addiction involved. Irreconcilable differences can simply mean that proof of the latter does not have to be provided to the court to dissolve the marriage. So there is a risk in assuming why the first marraige ended in divorce.

  88. Check my words again: I’m “assuming [NOTHING] why [Meghan Markle’s] first marriage ended in divorce”, but only accusing the farce and mockery the royal wedding is making out of Matthew 19:4-6, where, at BOTH the wedding and in scriptures, these words of Jesus were found:

    “Those whom God has joined together let no one put asunder”.

    So let me ask again, then:

    (1) Does Meghan Markle acknowledge that both she and Trevor Engelson were “those whom God has joined together”?

    (2) Did she obey Jesus’ commandment to “let no one put asunder” that union – not even letting herself do it?

    (3) Does Meghan Markle acknowledge that both she and Prince Harry are “those whom God has joined together” – after she has “put asunder … those whom God has joined together”, namely she and Trevor Engelson?

    (4) Is she obeying Jesus’ commandment to “let no one put asunder” her union with Prince Harry – even after she has “put asunder … those whom God has joined together”, namely she and Trevor Engelson?

Leave a Comment