• Sermon on the Dishonest Manager

    Here’s what I made of yesterday’s dreadful gospel reading…

     

     

    Why am I preaching on this terrible gospel reading?

    Why do bad things happen to good Provosts?

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

    I ranted and I raved. I roared and roamed about the Cathedral office like a prowling lion seeking whom I might devour whom resist steadfast in the faith.

    “Why” I cried. “Why am I on the preaching rota scheduled to preach on the parable of the dishonest manager?”

    What’s the point of having a Vice Provost if you end up preaching on the most difficult of gospel readings yourself?

    How come, I shrieked – how come I’m preaching on this? Who was it put me down to preach this week.

    Members of the cathedral staff in the office looked at me in a bemused way and reminded me that against their better judgement it is me, the same very provost who was complaining who compiles the preaching rota. It was me who had scheduled myself to preach on this wretched story.

    Wretched?

    Difficult?

    Impossible?

    Why so?

    Well, how on earth do you preach the good news when the gospel reading is all about seeing the good side of a dishonest manager?

    Really, what on earth was Jesus on about?

    And so I grumbled and moaned and sulked.

    My joy is gone. Grief is upon me. My heart is sick, I opined channelling the very spirit of the prophet Jeremiah at his gloomiest.

    Why do bad things happen to good provosts?

    Why do bad things happen to good people?

    Who hasn’t asked that question at one time or another?

    When you are merely cynical you ask why bad things happen to good people.

    When you graduate to being both cynical and bitter you ask why good things happen to bad people too.

    Those questions come up in Scripture. There are answers to those questions too – different contradictory answers which indicate that asking questions like that is part of the human condition. We’ve recently been reading the book of Job at morning prayer and it is page after page of people trying to find answers to those questions.

    I have no idea how you cope with a story in which a dishonest manager is the central figure.

    Is the dishonest manager being likened to God?

    Are we really being encouraged to behave like dishonest managers and with what are we being expected to be dishonest.

    This is one of those bible stories which make me wonder whether they even heard Jesus correctly when they were trying to remember all that he said.

    The sudden blast of wisdom that we get at the end “That you cannot serve two masters, you can’t serve God and money” is brilliant, instantly memorable and both true and profound. Yet it goes no way at all to answering the question of whether Jesus is promoting dishonesty or what we should make of it if he is.

    It seems to me though, on reflection that there’s a nougat of glory stashed away in this parable that might make us forget for a moment at least about that question.

    Isn’t it amazing that a dishonest manager might remind us of God?

    And isn’t that truth something that we might need reminding of.

    We are so ready to divide the world into the good and the bad (most of us presuming that we fall into the good category automatically).

    The thing is, problem with the very question “why do bad things happen to good people” is not the answer but the very question itself.

    In telling a story about a dishonest manager that someway is a way of passing on something about God and goodness, Jesus is reminding us that everyone bears the image and likeness of God.

    If we are going to ask pertinent questions, we might well ask why it is that bad people can sometimes be good.

    Why might a murderer be kind to an animal? Why might someone who is known in one context to be kind be cruel in another?

    The trouble is, we are complex creatures.

    For a long time I used to think that no-one was intrinsically evil.

    I have to admit that this was challenged when I became an ordinand and found that original sin was the only way I could really understand the cruelty of some of those who were trying to shape me and form me as a priest.

    But do I believe that people are utterly, intrinsically wicked and by nature separate from God?

    Plenty of bits of the Christian faith teach that this is so. Indeed I grew up having to sign up to the believe that and I quote: “all men have become sinners, totally depraved, and as such are justly exposed to the wrath of God.”

    I don’t think that now.

    I don’t think that because I believe people are more complex than that. And I don’t believe it because I think God’s love is more simple than that.

    I don’t think that now because I don’t believe in a God who is in the business of wrath. And I believe that human beings are generally more complex than simply being bad and depraved and then suddenly saved into being good.

    God’s love is either for everyone or God isn’t a God worth dealing with.

    And part of my justification for that is the existence of this story of the dishonest manager.

    All kinds of people are heaven bound – dishonest managers amongst them.

    All kinds of people reflect the essence and nature of God. And not the people who would come at the top of our lists.

    For in this kingdom we are heading for things are not quite what you expect anyway.

    From time to time I ask people for suggestions for the badge stall at the back of the church. One of the surprising good sellers is a badge that simply says, “make no assumptions”.

    And we must make no assumptions about the bad and the good.

    For all are made in the image and likeness of God and all are loved anyway.

    All are loved anyway.

    Must make that into a badge.

13 responses to “Peter Tatchell on Outing Bishops”

  1. Ann Avatar

    I agree — as The Rt Rev. Barbara Harris says, “it is okay to be in the closet as long as you are not using it as a machine gun nest”

  2. Erika Baker Avatar
    Erika Baker

    While the CoE policy is completely crazy and homophobic, it is consistent in itself.
    Gay sexual relationships are not permitted for clergy.
    So the official line is that all CP’s clergy follow this rule – and who knows, some may actually follow it! Stranger things have happened!

    But marriage is different because it is defined as a sexual relationship (and the Alice in Wonderland “I am not seeing reality” ignores marriages between people who cannot or do not want to have sex).
    And so no amount of looking elsewhere can distract from the fact that your married gay priest is not celibate.

    That’s the faultline.
    And outing non-married gay bishops, partnered or not, does not touch this.
    They can all to a man say that they are following church policy.

    1. Stephen Peters Avatar
      Stephen Peters

      Yes, Erica. But somehow, and more hugely, no. That Gay Bishops hide and allow gay clergy to be demonised on any front, is just not on. Church Policy or no = They should be working to change this appalling policy, not supporting it to harm the lives of truly loving couples.

    2. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
      Rosemary Hannah

      The whole insane situation is made more invidious by the fact that one of the arguments trotted out against marriage between people of the same gender is that they could not (in the eyes of some detractors) actually have sex. Sex was, to these people, certain acts and certain acts alone. I suspect the same arguments pertain in the HoB and that people in partnerships with another of their own gender can make what is, in the eyes of the HoB, a perfectly valid case they are not ‘having sex’ with their partner.

      The situation is nuts, perfectly nuts. The answer is for straight people, and for celibate people, who have the least to lose, to stand up, and shout. The higher up the ecclesiastical tree they are, the more important it is that they do this.

  3. Richard Avatar
    Richard

    Both Erika and Stephen make fair points. As I see things, those who scramble for scripture to justify treating people as second class citizens in a way that trench troops scramble for the last round of ammunition as the “enemy” marches inexorably
    forward, will view outing as inflammatory.
    If anything, this could widen the schism. Could this fracture the C of E in a way that women’s rights threatened to? As the breath of equality, dignity and fairness dominates the secular world and is very much present in many hidden corners of the church, possibly so. It could certainly further damage the church’s membership.
    If these are possibilities then perhaps the church’s leaders might be forced to discuss this in the open should outing occur. I remain sceptical that fundamentalists will cast aside their theological guns as it were, but the church will be a healthier place for having open and honest debate and reflection- and action. I’d rather see a reduced sized church that is founded on fairness and honesty rather than a larger body that hides behind the armour of theological confusion and hypocrisy on this issue.
    I’m saddened to reflect that I don’t believe that the main church will countenance or confer equality and dignity. Whatever the cost. Hopefully, I might be wrong.

  4. Dennis Avatar
    Dennis

    When you go outing an anti-equality CofE bishop be prepared for all sorts of ugly hate filled email. I saved a few of the nicer responses just because they were so amazingly horrible. A couple of emails were frightening and a right wing Anglican blog tracked down and posted my work contact information. Six and a half years later I still get sick at my stomach thinking about it. And honestly it has no impact on anyone other than the now out-of-the-closet bishop who will lie and deny deny deny. Do it but be prepared for an ugly situation on your hands.

  5. James Byron Avatar
    James Byron

    What’s to be gained? The ’90s mass-outing did nothing to change the church’s homophobic trajectory, and I doubt a repeat would do an any better. Either the bishop will refuse to comment, and the story dies; or they admit it, and are forced to resign. It could backfire hugely, making the people doing the outing look vindictive. Many traditionalists would sympathize with the outed bishops.

    Besides, what makes people think there’s any gay English bishops to out? Everything I’ve seen to date has been rumor and innuendo, usually nudge-nudge comments about Anglo-Catholics with a love of white port and vestments.

    The problem is, at heart, economic: rich evangelical parishes could bankrupt the church overnight if they chose. A handful of bishops can’t change that. Instead, open evangelicals need to be convinced to change their minds. Any fight for equal rights that isn’t supported by people like Ian Paul, N.T. Wright, Graham Kings and Nicky Gumbel will go nowhere.

  6. Peter Ould Avatar
    Peter Ould

    From the conservative side, if you’re going to out anybody, out them because they’re being hypocrites. There is nothing to be gained from outing men who have been sexually active in the past but are not any longer, or who have always been celibate. But if there are members of the House of Bishops who are sexually active with someone of the same sex, outing them is less to do with homosexuality and more to do with hypocrisy. It is unacceptable in any line of business to demand one thing of your staff and then to do the exact opposite yourself.

    Of course, what will happen in practice is that men will be named who are celibate, or who have repented of previous sexual activity and this will just backfire, because it will be seen to be vindictive and nothing more. As far as I know, there are no hypocrites in the House of Bishops on this issue, but please do correct me if you have any knowledge to the contrary.

  7. Fr Steve Avatar

    It seems difficult to justify perpetrating one sin towards another on the basis of the fact they themselves have perpetrated an act of sin(hypocritical abuse of power). This doesn’t seem to me like the Jesus who stood before Pontius Pilate.
    We may ask ourselves what then do you do?….do we really gain anything by not just fighting sin with sin. But by promoting sin (outing)…for surely such it is! We do nothing to advance the cause of justice.

  8. Kelvin Avatar

    It is not my view that we can derive our ethics from scripture – for that reason, I’m a little hesitant about the comparison with Jesus standing before Pontius Pilate.

    There are quite a lot of examples, I think, when Jesus did speak directly about hypocrisy.

    There’s also Nathan the prophet confronting David over Bathsheba.

    None of these proves anything – scripture doesn’t prove an ethical decision to be right one way or another. It is worth noting though that scripture seems to me to be far from one-sided on this matter.

  9. Fr Steve Avatar

    Was very mindful Kelvin of these examples when jesus was confrontationist…..but outing is just horrible

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      We are in a horrible situation. Yes.

  10. Fr Steve Avatar

    I don’t actually agree with the statement “scripture doesn’t prove an ethical decision to be right one way or another”
    but do understand the complexity of: ‘that scripture seems to me to be far from one-sided on this matter.’
    At Mass yesterday (my first in my new parish: stmarymags125.blogspot.com.au)
    I was harangued by a parishioner who objected to the fact that I had told the congregation that ABM-A (Australian Church’s Missionary Agency) has launched a campaign for funds for Gaza
    She told me, as rightists do….that all Palestinians are wrong!….didn’t seem to know that most Anglicans in the Holy Lands are Arabs of Palestinian origin.
    She obviously hadn’t heard my first sermon …that catholic means universal and that our God & Jesus loves everyone! That is what ‘universal’ means.
    The Church is just awful…hypocritical yet loved by God…just as She loves those who are different from us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Dream

    Had this weird dream involving Eric Idle, rollerblading nuns and some morris dancers. Oh, wait a minute…..

  • Review: Leaving Alexandria: A Memoir of Faith and Doubt – Richard Holloway

    Here’s my review of Bishop Richard’s book which recently appeared in inspires: It is hard these days to engage with the media of the chattering classes without encountering Richard Holloway. He who was once merely our Primus has become the darling of the exasperated folk for whom the church is no longer a vehicle for…

  • Sermon preached on Sunday 5 August 2012

    Here’s what I said on Sunday. I ask you. Which sounds more fun – the fleshpots of Egypt or wandering aimlessly in the desert? It is not hard to have some sympathy with the children of Israel. Moses and Aaron have led them away from a life which was unfair though one which was mundane…

  • Revised Commenting Policy

    I’ve posted something like this before but have had to add the final bullet point today. (And have today decided not to allow any further comments from the offender who caused me to add this last point. It seems to me that he has been warned enough). The following types of comments will be deleted…