What is in Kelvin's Head?

Here’s to you, Bishop Robinson

05/01/2013
The Church of England is in full brouhaha mode today over gay bishops once again. Before saying anything about that, I think it is important to give a shout out to the Rt Rev Gene Robinson who is retiring today as Bishop of New Hampshire. It was obvious when he was elected and consecrated that the issues which excited people so much about him were going to be coming to churches all around the world. So it has proved.

I caught up with Bishop Gene in September in San Francisco. He was the preacher in Grace Cathedral whilst I was there on my sabbatical trip. I could see him trying to work out who I was from across the sanctuary. When I reminded him that I was the person who invited him to celebrate the eucharist in Glasgow during the Lambeth conference, a time when he was said to be banned from every altar in England, his face lit up. Indeed, he described the visit to Glasgow as a “lifesaver” at a very low time.

I’m grateful to him for his ministry here, one of the most electric Sunday mornings since I came here. I’m also grateful to him for keeping the faith, preaching the gospel and standing up to injustice. And yes, I’m proud of having known the first out gay man in a partnership (marriage now…) who became a bishop.Â So, here’s to you, Bishop Robinson, Jesus loves you more than you can know. And I’m thankful for what you shared about that love whilst Bishop of New Hampshire.

Bishop Gene seemed full of beans and pleased to be alive. He has good cause. When I stood next to him in 2008 in St Mary’s there were serious threats being made to his life and he couldn’t even distribute the communion elements because there was a fear that someone would stab him. Thank God things were more relaxed when I saw him recently. It was the Feast of St Francis in San Francisco itself and he and I got involved in blessing dogs, cats and a rather lively macaw.

It is abundantly clear today that it is not all about Gene Robinson any more. The compromise that has been announced in England in the last 24 hours only turns the clock back by about 18 months and I’m genuinely surprised by all the excitement in the media about it. Nothing has changed since yesterday. The key facts remain the same:
- The Church of England behaves badly to gay people in leadership
- The public discourse of the Church of England at major festivals is dominated by a prurient interest in Jeffrey John’s private life.
- The media don’t understand it but like the fuss and use any excuse to put nutters on the television
I see only two ways in which this could end. Either one side or the other will win or alternatively there will be an agreement within the church that different views about human sexuality may be held with integrity. I rather favour the latter. It would need some common understandings about sexual ethics that focused on fidelity, passion and love rather than this uninspiring display of public disagreement but I think that could be achieved.

I see no other options.

Here in Scotland, I think that it is quite likely that a majority of people in the church would agree with me though it has not been tested. Meanwhile, our College of Bishops and our Faith and Order Board continue to behave as though a winner takes all approach to these issues (whereby we are all supposed to have our actions limited by the opinions of some) is the answer to what is wrong.

The truth is, that attitude is not the answer, it is the problem. And somehow or another we need to move towards something more sensible, for our good and the good of all God’s holy church.

Amen.
bishops, Church of England, gay, Gene Robinson, LGBT

9 responses to “Biobank – an ethical question”

Rev Ruth

25/10/2007

I’ve been asked too. And I got so excited – you know how I love all things medical. My mind had already raced off into the realms of them finding that I had some mysterious disease… But now that you put it like that, I guess I’d better give it some more thought.

Reply
Raspberry Rabbit

25/10/2007

I haven’t been asked. Radical foreign clerics must not be on the list.

I’d be hesitant to do it anyway. Too much information is being stored about us in anticipation of the day when it might prove useful. Best to keep your head down.

RR

Reply
Tim

25/10/2007

Eeek. I saw the phrase “Do you want to do something good today? Not just for yourself, but for our children and our children’s children?” near the top of the page and instantly the thought occurred, “what’s the potential cost? Where are the privacy controls?” Not as though anyone’s asked me anyway, but that sort of thing worries me from the outset too.

A little more investigation shows http://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/faqs/confidentiality.php , particularly #5 etc; it seems too vague, just a gloss to placate the masses. I don’t want `computers unconnected to the internet’; I’d want a guarantee that they never will be, that no floppy disks or other methods will result in data coming off them, and that they’re well secured in a bunker somewhere.

Reply
chris

25/10/2007

We’re involved. My sister-in-law first; she asked my husband; we discussed it and decided the potential for knowledge and research into – for example – the hereditary factor in clinical depression – made it something we wanted to do. Our sons have also expressed a willingness to participate. I personally don’t care about what happens to my DNA (other than its continuation in my family!) and if some good can come out of it then that’s just fine. I trust scientists every bit as much (or as little) as I trust anyone else.

Reply
asphodeline

25/10/2007

Have you seen Heroes???? Sounds like a sneaky plot to find more 🙂

Reply
kelvin

25/10/2007

I have not seen Heroes. Is it about eugenics?

Reply
asphodeline

26/10/2007

Ah. It has a hint of eugenics. Part of the plotline involves some form of research into the DNA of people with supernatural powers!

Reply
kelvin

26/10/2007

Ah, I see why you associated it with me.

Reply
Andrew

19/03/2008

My wife I also each received one of the so called invitations today, my first reaction was anger over the wording of the invitation which by telling me I have a “provisional appointment” assuming I am gullible enough to fall for the use of false authority syndrome.

I am really concerned a lot of less literate people will not fully understand the “invitation” and assume it something they have to do.

What really makes my blood boil is the that even if you don’t want to take part you have to reply to get your name removed from the records, this raises real civil liberties issues.

The thing is if I had been asked to participate in I a nice way I would have been very keen to do so, however the whole tone of the letter stinks of authoritarianism and reminds me of the kind of thing the Nazis were doing in the mid 1930s.

If you get one of these invitation say no and tell them why — or better still rip it up.

Reply