I see that the Church of England has ordained another gay bishop. However, as the English are a lot less honest about such things than the Americans, do not expect him to admit to the fact publicly and do not expect him to be excluded from the next Lambeth Conference by the Archbishop of Canterbury.



    • Peter O, can you not see how REPULSIVE (in the true sense of the word, esp to the secular world) that question is???

      You can do evangelism, or you can publicly ask whether someone (anyone) is “sexually active.” You CANNOT do both.

    • Jeffrey John was not sexually active when the Philip Giddings of this world threatened all sorts of things if Rowan Williams didn’t stop his appointment to Oxford. So the problem evangelicals have appears to be an aversion to honesty.

    • I do believe that one’s attitude to one’s previous sexual activity is also taken into account. So, it would be perfectly possible to be a Bishop, gay, previously sexually active but now repentant and teaching (and living) an orthodox stance. Let the reader understand.

  1. In my dream world, TEC has finally by the time of the next Lambeth developed enough courage to return all of the invitations unless all of the bishops are invited. I know, I am probably demonically controlled, about to become gay, and therfore having evil dreams. Or something amazingly dumb like that.


  2. Is the rule now that “sexually active” gay priests may not be ordained bishop but there’s no bar for sexually passive gay priests? The rules are becoming too complicated — one needs a Jesuit or a rabbi to keep them as all straight (as it were).

    • Not quite. The rule is that sexually passive gay priests and sexually active gay priests may be ordained if they don’t tell anybody, other than their friends at St. Stephens and Mirfield, that they are gay or, in the case of the sexually active ones, get found out. Sexually passive and sexually active gay priests who are completely open about their sexuality are barred under the “Philip Giddings Amendment” from any job in the Church of England other than in a cathedral where anything goes and always has done.

      Is that clear now, Doctor?

  3. My dear MP, I assume you are aware of the difference between a “sexually passive” priest and a “sexually inactive” priest. They are not remotely the same thing!

  4. By the way Jonathan, you would do you position a great deal of benefit by actually naming who you mean rather than constantly hiding behind innuendo. Just get it over and done with if you’re so sure about someone’s sexuality.