Leading Articles

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 12° London Hi 16°C / Lo 8°C

Leading article: The bishop is embracing a lost cause

Ear-splitting rows are part of the warp and woof of the Church of England – the price paid for a Church that has always claimed to be national and inclusive rather than dogmatic.

Claims that the Bishop of Rochester's dramatic call for homosexuals to "repent" marks a milestone towards a formal divorce in the Church between liberals and evangelicals, therefore, must be approached with caution. In many ways, the battle fought in the Church today over same-sex relations is still far more decorous and charitable than most of the Anglicans' earlier feuds.

In the 19th century, evangelicals engaged in pitched battles with High Church "ritualist" opponents in London churches, using stones and cudgels. There is no sign yet of Dr Nazir-Ali or his supporters resorting to such tactics with gay or outspokenly pro-gay vicars.

History suggests that almost every generation throws up a symbolic issue that conservative Christians then seize on as the ultimate challenge to tradition and orthodoxy. "No pasaran!" they declare: "They shall not pass!"

Yet even the most conservative Anglicans today would probably be embarrassed to revisit those lost battles. How many want to maintain now, as did their ancestors, that the world was created in seven days or the Pope was the anti-Christ? Little more than a century ago such beliefs were perfectly normal in the Church of England. Now they appear ludicrous.

Some conservative Christians no doubt believe they are on safer ground in sounding the tocsin against the monstrous regiment of homosexuals, partly because a large proportion of society remains homophobic. They know that many socially conservative people who would not dream of going to church will, nevertheless, lend noisy approval to such a campaign.

They need to be careful. Society is changing fast in its understanding of the workings of the human heart. "Out" gay cabinet ministers would have been inconceivable a few years ago, as would the presence of a prime minister's wife at Gay Pride. Conservative Christians like Dr Nazir-Ali, in other words, need to think twice before embracing a cause that only embarrasses future generations of believers.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Priorities, priorities, priorities
[info]bushspoodle wrote:
Sunday, 5 July 2009 at 11:31 pm (UTC)
If I was Sarah Brown, or, at least, if my "feminine side" was Sarah Brown, I'd be far more concerned about the PM's holding on to that seat than attending a HIGHLY SELF-CONSCIUOS Gay Parade.
Homosexualists and christianity
[info]vaitibi wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 06:10 am (UTC)
At least the Bishop of Rochester is trying to keep christian teachings from being overwhelmed by the politically correct dogma that blites pubic life today. You may not agree with what he says but in our democratic society it is his right to say so, and our right to accept or reject what he says. You either accept christian teachngs or you don't, it is your choice and the Tatchells and Bradshaws of this world have no right to bully people about sexual procilivity. I loathe homosexuals - have done ever since I was raped by one at school.
Re: Homosexualists and christianity
[info]tallskin wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 01:51 pm (UTC)
"Ever since I was raped by one at school! "

Lucky bastard!
Society
[info]adullamite wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 06:46 am (UTC)
Society may be changing, but at heart people are the same as always.
Their needs are the same as when the good news was first announced, and any change in society does not alter this.
Church and State
[info]markwoods wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 06:51 am (UTC)
Perhaps by using the bully-pulpit of a bishop Dr Nazir-Ali triggers a reaction in folks, who see this homophobic activity as a conflation of matters particular to church versus state. Dr Nazir-Ali holds a prestigious office in a historically influential and previously politically powerful institution, which systematically interfered with civil laws over the centuries. He is a bishop, which is perceived as a corporate officer, of the Church of England.

This is an institution with perceived wealth, power and influence (i.e., it's a church that has as its titular head 'Supreme Governor of the Church of England' a monarch who is also titular head of the British civil government). His official pronouncements should be guiding people spiritually, but he prefers to command folks about civil matters.

He is compromising his office, effectively, but he cannot avoid this, because his almost literalist interpretation of religion paints him into a theological box, which exists to protect the status quo, rather than bestow light and comfort.
When abnormality becomes normal.
[info]manofpo wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 07:19 am (UTC)
It seems overwhelmingly normal to be homophobic and equally abnormal to be homosexual - or am I backward here?!
Re: When abnormality becomes normal.
[info]abcw703 wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 10:54 am (UTC)
Maybe not "backward" - I'm not sure I am optimistic enough to believe in 'progress' as a linear path from mediaeval darkness to utopian enlightenment, but you are confused. Just because homosexuality is in the minority, this doesn't mean it's abnormal.

As for homophobia being normal, why do you care? This is the question I've never had satisfactorily explained to me by homophobes. What does it matter to you if I, in the privacy of my own home, choose to have sex with another man? I am sure there are other relationships you do not understand or would not wish to participate in. There must be men and women to whom you have strong antipathies, but does that breed hatred and terror of their wives and husbands?

What IS normal about homophobia? Because to me, it genuinely seems insane.
Keep up the good work
[info]mallen67 wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 08:55 am (UTC)
Much as I think Mr Nazir-Ali is a despicable little cretin, he should be encouraged to push forward with his campaign, as it will undoubtably lead to a split in the CofE, which in turn will help quicken disestablishmant, which will in turn make "faith" an even less effective "shield of respectability" from behind which to spout your bigotry.

Keep up the good work Mr Nazir-Ali !
Nazir-Ali a Christian?
[info]arthur_ide wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 11:04 pm (UTC)
Nazi-Ali does not represent any message given by Jesus. He represents Old Testament ignorance and hatred. Even saying that, it is obvious he reads selectively and poorly--and has none of the academic tools to interpret the bible literally or figuratively. To condemn homosexuality is found nowhere in the bible, for the story of Sodom (Genesis 19) is clarified in Ezekial 16:49--it was the inability to help the poor and suffering--charitable acts that the "bishop" is not known for. Nazi-Ali obviously has not even read Matthew 7:1, nor any other message by the man he worships. Nazi-Ali is a disgrace to the UK and the Anglican Church and should return to the primitive roots from which he oozed out of.
Ezekiel 16:50
[info]shechem wrote:
Tuesday, 7 July 2009 at 10:05 pm (UTC)
And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.

Columnist Comments

dominic_lawson

Dominic Lawson: Why the British will never love Europe

'The Continent' we called it, knowing we were not of it

mary_dejevsky

Mary Dejevsky: Incentives that work the wrong way

London Metropolitan University is a very far cry indeed from Oxbridge

thomas_sutcliffe

Tom Sutcliffe: Should we pay double to save the bookshop?

A civilized city without bookshops struck me as a contradiction in terms


Loading...


Most popular in Opinion