Starting Something I Can Never Finish

Today I'm going to talk about something I've meant to talk about for a long time. The problem is that, as a topic, it's rather too big to cover in any one post. So consider this the start of a mini series - a blog with in a blog. Broadly, this mini-series will cover religion (more precisely, Christianity).

Before I go too far, I should declare an interest: I'm a practising Christian, from the Anglican (Church of England) denomination. I worship at a fairly traditional parish church.

I'm going to start this series by talking about a story from the news this week that angered me intensely. To summarise, the Church of England - my church - looks set to allow gay clergy to become bishops, provided they remain celibate.

Now let me declare a second interest. I think that this proposal is complete, utter, absolute arse gravy (thanks to Stephen Fry for that phrase).

Before you think badly of me, let me be clear: The reason I hate this announcement, the reason it fills me with rage, is not because it goes too far, but because it doesn't go far enough. What the hell is that celibacy bit doing there? Who is that for?

I'm pretty sure that most people who read this will find the idea of forcing celibacy on gay clergy abhorrent (straight vicars in the Anglican Church are perfectly free to marry, and have all manner of sexy fun). Actually, why confine my assertion to the small demographic that are my reader? I'm pretty sure most right-thinking members of society would find the idea abhorrent. It goes aginst decency, common sense - for God's sake, it goes against the laws of this country. And yet, for some reason, it would seem that those at the top in the Church of England think this is the right thing to do.

At the moment I'm disconsolate. It honestly feels like the Archbishop of Canterbury (who I previously respected), along with others in power, is trying to kill the church.

I always liked the Church of England because, compared to other denominations, it was progressive. It also seemed able to unite people with a wide range of ideas and opinions. I still think it should try and do that, but I draw the line at trying to encompass ideas that are simply not christian.

What you learn from day one in christian teaching is that Jesus (the ultimate poster boy for our religion) did not discriminate. Think of the Good Samaritan. Think about of the woman prostitute he considered a close friend. He didn't treat them any differently. He saw them as people, no better and no worse than any other person. I'm astoundingly sure that, if he were around today, he'd not discriminate in the way that the C. of E. decision-makers are threatening to. Furthermore, I think he'd go and kick some metophrical ass.

Apart from the obvious discrimination, the worst thing about all this is the message it sends about what Anglican Christianity is all about. Contrary to this evidence, most Anglican Christians are forward-thinking, compassionate people who are embarrassed by such discrimination. Yes - of course there are discriminatory idiots who call themselves christian, but I strongly believe the proportion of them is no greater than the proportion of similar people in wider society. It just happens that some of them are in positions of significance.

I briefly wondered whether to boycott the church - to stop going in protest. But I've realised how counterproductive that would be. I'm going to make my feelings known, certainly. But I'm not going to leave my church to the biggots. It's my job, and the job of other moderate Christians, to make sure the view of the Church (as seen by the wider world) is a balanced one - not dominated by one extreme, idiotic viewpoint.

And so it begins.