• Emerging glistening from the water – sermon preached on 7 July 2019

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

    I emerged from the water, radiant and glistening in the sunlight and made my way up onto the beach.

    Not like Daniel Craig emerging from the sea in Casino Royale.

    Not even like Ursula Andress coming up out of the waves in Dr No.

    No – I emerged from the waves more like Venus, the goddess of Love arriving on the shore in Botticelli’s famous painting.

    Not that there were many witnesses. Not for me the crowds of people in the Uffizi Gallery looking upon the goddess of Love.

    My only company as I emerged onto the beach a fortnight ago was a friendly grey seal whom I had put on watch when I flung off my clothes and ran into the exhilarating waters of the Atlantic when on holiday in the Western Isles.

    And now I emerged joyful and feeling incredible.

    If you can swim in the Atlantic off Scotland, even in July you can do anything. Emerging from the freezing water, you suddenly feel warm. You suddenly feel invincible.

    But that seems to be quite a long way from Naaman’s experience.

    I rather love the story of Naaman the commander of the army of Aram. He is a man with great power who finds himself in great need.

    There are so many ways to dive into his story. Let me just pick on three… the way power works in the story, the sevenfold advice that Elisha gives and what happened to the servant girl.

    Power first. Naaman is clearly man with great power but someone who finds himself in great need.

    But this is the bible. The usual conventions about power are very obviously going to be turned upside down. There’s the obvious way that the ability to unlock his suffering comes not from conventional power, privilege and prestige but from someone who is enslaved and owned by him. The slave girl has no power and no agency. But still the word comes from her that directs Naaman to his place of healing.

    But there is also the disruptive fact that Naaman is an enemy. According to the conventions of his day he doesn’t deserve anything from an enslaved woman from the people of Israel. But he doesn’t deserve anything from the God of Israel either.

    I love the way this story undermines the idea that God is only with us. If Naaman can be healed, God must also be with them, whoever they are.

    So many of the stories in the bible are about the human ability to divide the world into us and them – this story very clearly undermines that.

    On this weekend when Glasgow has had its biggest Orange Walk, I warm to a biblical story which undermines the idea of religion being about dividing people.

    The religious practise that Elisha advocates is as available for the outsider and the enemy of Israel as it is available for the insider and the regular worshipper.

    Religion that undermines sectarian divisions is religion worth taking notice of and diving into.

    Secondly, I notice that Naaman isn’t just told to go and bathe in a river but to bathe again and again. A sevenfold bathing.

    (The truth is, once was enough in the chilly Atlantic waters for me so I might have some sympathy for Naaman if he objected to having to jump in seven times).

    Religion is often about finding that building rhythm into life is healthy and lifegiving.

    I’m not sure we talk about that enough.

    It happens to be the case that if Christians could reacquire the habit of weekly attendance at worship, most of the decline that has been experienced by Christianity in this country would be wiped out overnight.

    But even that isn’t the point. We need to do liturgical acts regularly because that is how they work.

    Whether it is the ritual act of bathing seven  times or encouraging one another in regular weekly holy habits of coming to church, it is the repetition that gives the experience greater depth and somehow unlocks things inside us.

    When we do things again and again, we become part of the thing we are doing. Instead of us doing something to the thing, the thing starts to do something to us.

    We are shaped and changed and made whole by repeatedly doing things that give us life.

    Those things change us and make us act and behave differently in future.

    And the future is the last thing I notice about the story.

    The bit missing for me is when  Naaman goes home and sets the slave girl free in acknowledgement that as he is free, the person who unlocked his freedom needs to be freed from her slavery. He’s been freed from his affliction. Why shouldn’t she be freed from the affliction of being owned?

    But that didn’t happen. Or at least we never heard of it. The bible is silent on what happened to her.

    It is too late for her. Naaman appears not to have freed her.

    But it isn’t too late for many who are still enslaved.

    This week a horrendous case came to light of modern slavery.

    It isn’t too late to set slaves free. It is still an imperative laid upon us.

    If Naaman didn’t get work out that should have come next, we can.

    When those in the past practised obvious injustice – obvious to us in our own day then it falls upon us to do the good in the future that didn’t happen in their day.

    Slave girls and slave boys,  slave women and slave men can still be set free.

    People need to be freed from real modern slavery today. And people need to be set free from all kinds of other things that harm them too.

    And as I ran up and down on the stunning empty beach miles from anywhere I started to feel warm and joyful and whole. And I felt invincible. I felt as though I could do anything.

    And that it what it is like for people plunged into the goodness that is God’s love.

    We enact that in baptism.

    Once we are out of that water, we are invincible, for we emerge encouraged by the very God of Love who walks this world and loves us very much.

    Together with God, we are invincible.

    We can do anything.

    There is no wrong that can’t be righted.

    For God’s love is real, and strong, wonderful.

    And that love is with you.

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

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

  • Prayer for Flight MH17

    It would appear from news report that are still breaking that there is a very strong likelihood that the Malaysian plane which has crashed in the Ukraine has been brought down deliberately by someone as yet unknown but connected with the conflict that rages in that part of the world. It is one of those…

  • Pride Meeting Point – A Correction

    This coming Saturday there will be a Pride march in Glasgow. There will be a gathering of Scottish Episcopalians (and friends) marching together in glad array. Last week I announced that we would meet at the southern end of the Wiggly Bridge (which is the Tradeston Pedestrian Bridge), which is not the Squinty Bridge (which…

  • Mixed feelings about the Church of England vote on bishops

    I’ve very mixed feelings about the vote that has just taken place in the Church of England Synod regarding the question of whether that church should allow women to be able to made bishops. On the one hand, I know some of the women who are likely to be made bishops and I know the…

  • Sermon – the parable of the sower

      The church is completely obsessed with one topic. Whenever you go to church meetings there is one thing that dominates everything and has done so for at least the last 15 or 20 years. We talk about it endlessly. Whether it is local regional chapters, diocesan synod, General Synod or even the meetings of…