SELLING POINT

from Midwest Conservative Journal by The Editor

Assume that unrepentant-homosexual Jeffrey John becomes the next Anglican Bishop of Southwark. More and more sources seem to think that John’s appointment is a done deal. Damian Thompson points out that John seems to have the support of David Cameron, Britain’s new “conservative” Prime Minister:

David Cameron apparently supports Dr John’s candidacy. Nothing could underline Cameron’s right-on credentials more effectively than supporting the episcopal ordination of a Left-wing gay priest. He doesn’t even really open himself up to accusations of tokenism, since Dean John is the obvious choice: popular, clever and a former member of the chapter of Southwark Cathedral. The Bankside gay community would love having him as their bishop – and they might love Dave a little better for helping put him there. The fact that the PM’s constitutional right to intervene in the appointment of bishops is antiquated and undemocratic would be ignored just this once, I reckon.

And the Primates of England and All England did not block his name from consideration.

Yet, despite the undoubted furore that would erupt from his appointment, it is highly likely that Dr John will become the Church’s first openly homosexual bishop.

For a start, he was not blocked by either Dr Williams or Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, who also sits on the Commission, from being included on the shortlist.

So let’s say John gets the pointy hat. How does Rowan Williams explain it to the rest of the Anglican Communion? As I see it, Dr. Williams has one line of argument and only one. Dr. John’s alleged celibacy.

Dr John is a hugely divisive figure in the church after he was forced to stand down from becoming the Bishop of Reading in 2003 after it emerged he was in a homosexual, but celibate, relationship.

Conservatives, on the other hand, would be incensed at the promotion of a cleric who has strongly argued for a more liberal attitude towards sexuality and is in a long-standing, though celibate, homosexual relationship.

A celibate relationship, Gracie? Katherine sounds like she’s not buying it.

Call me cynical. If a man and a woman have a romantic relationship, and matters progress to the physical, they are extremely unlikely to remain a pair while swearing off all physical contact. They’ll break up instead. Dr. John and his partner clearly teach and believe that there is nothing wrong with same-sex physical contact. As the article says, short of being caught in the act, their claim of celibacy has to be accepted. The Church needs to call people who teach what the Church teaches to avoid this kind of contradiction.

Anyone who lived through the presidency of Bill “The Meaning Of Is” Clinton shares Katherine’s skepticism. When the Monica Lewinsky scandals broke, we were told again and again that the fact that Mr. Clinton enjoyed strapping on the presidential milking machine didn’t mean that he was having sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

After all, there was absolutely no chance whatsoever of anybody getting pregnant, now was there? Game, set and match, Puritan. Scoreboard and all that.

And I guess if your girlfriend enjoys an occasional spanking, you two aren’t having sex either unless both of you…you know…later on…you know. Jesus, of course, said that you are but His opinion doesn’t count for much these days, particularly to a liberal theoloigan like Jeffrey John.

Then there’s the fact that Anglicans can “interpret” words to mean anything they want them to mean. No, no, no, no. Resolution D025 doesn’t repeal Resolution B033 at all. Heaven forfend. Perish the thought. Cross our hearts and hope to die.

D025 is merely descriptive of where we are as a church. So, pace D025, our election of another homosexual pointy hat is not a violation of the Communion moratorium against homosexual pointy hats. So Dr. John has many illustrative examples with which to work.

Add to that the fact that, as Episcopalians well know, nothing is ever permanent in the Anglican world. Women’s ordination will always be totally optional and no one will ever, ever, ever be forced to violate their consciences. Whoops, now it is mandatory and as far as we’re concerned, your conscience can go to hell.

If the Church of England gives a pointy hat to a homosexual who doesn’t believe homosexual activity is a sin but claims to be “celibate,” it’s pretty much a certainty that the next C of E homosexual bishop won’t be. Or Dr. John may, once he gets his pointy hat, drop the whole “celibacy” pretense entirely. After all, it’s not like the Church will depose him or anything.

So I don’t think the Global South primates will buy any of it. I also don’t think they’ll care. If John gets Southwark, there may or may not be a dramatic confrontation at the next Primates Meeting(having Bob Duncan fly over and demanding his admittance, say, or a walk-out).

I do think that quite a few primates will skip the meeting entirely. Some sort of get-together here in North America held at about the same time as the Primates Meeting and with Bob Duncan as a prominent participant is certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

But what’s most likely to happen is that conservative Anglican primates and provinces will, more and more, simply ignore the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Anglican Communion’s “instruments of unity.”

Completely.