ROWAN WILLIAMS, the Archbishop of Canterbury, is commendably honest. In an interview published a year ago, he admitted: “I’m hopeless at strategy.” Sadly, for those of us who admire him in other ways, it shows. For he is up against people who are brilliant at strategy. The conservative evangelicals who were determined to win the scalp of Dr Jeffrey John, the now not-to-be Bishop of Reading, have rolled the Archbishop over.
You might think that Dr John should be commended for his honesty too, since honesty is a Christian virtue. But no, he has been penalised for it. Other gay bishops who have kept their sexuality secret remain on the bench. Dr John, who never paraded it but was prepared to tell the truth when asked, has been treated abominably. “You would not do this to a dog,” said one of his many distressed supporters.
What is most lamentable in all this is that while goodness has been punished, nastiness has been rewarded. The conservative evangelicals blackmailed Dr Williams by threatening to bankrupt and/or divide the Church if Dr John’s consecration went ahead. In anyone’s book, blackmail is a worse sin than a celibate, faithful same-sex relationship.
Dr John’s opponents, if they have an ounce of Christian sentiment, should be feeling deeply ashamed of themselves this week. A good, holy, intelligent man has been crucified by their actions. But I doubt that they feel in any way repentant; on the contrary, many of them are now planning whom they can bring down next.
I gather that only a few weeks ago, when Dr John suggested to Dr Williams that he would stand down if asked, the Archbishop replied: “Don’t you dare!” So Dr John’s resolve was stiffened, and he braced himself to put up with the hounding of his partner, his parents and himself. Then, last Saturday, with no warning, he was told that he would have to withdraw. So what happened in that intervening period? The Most Rev Peter Akinola, the Archbishop of Nigeria, threatened schism — although all that means in practice is that Nigeria might not attend the Lambeth Conference in 2008. Nigeria’s Church made no fuss when Archbishop Desmond Tutu consecrated an openly gay bishop in 1993 in South Africa. It seems that this is abhorrent only when it happens in white societies.
Archbishop Akinola, in an extraordinary article in the Church Times last Friday, compared homosexuality with bestiality. Yet he is yet to condemn the stoning to death of an adulteress in Nigeria planned for next month. The Church in Nigeria turns a blind eye to polygamy and wife-beating. It has done little to stem the promiscuity that has led to the appalling epidemic of Aids in Africa. If Dr Williams were prepared to speak with the courage of his convictions, he might remind the Nigerians about what the Bible has to say on motes and beams or glass houses and stones. We tolerate their cultural differences. Why cannot they tolerate ours? Conservative evangelicals here are equally selective in their reading of the Bible. Jesus had harsh words to say about divorce and remarriage, yet they welcome divorced and remarried people to their churches. Jesus had nothing whatsoever to say about homosexuality, yet they were prepared to use the most unchristian tactics to drive a chaste gay man out of his job.
By colluding with their agenda, and forcing Dr John to withdraw, Dr Williams has elevated the unity of the Anglican Communion and the financial health of the Church above any moral principle. Yet it is doubtful whether the Nigerians would secede since they have nowhere else to go. And what is so wonderful about unity that it must be maintained at all costs? As for the domestic problem of evangelical parishes withdrawing funds from their dioceses, this threat has been overplayed. Their departure would save the centre a lot of money in salaries, housing, repairs, curates and training, to be set against the income it would lose. And even if the centre did suffer a financial loss, should it not be prepared to run its affairs more frugally in the interests of what it believes to be right? Otherwise it looks as if the Church’s principles are up for sale to the highest bidder.
Anglican liberals are livid at what has happened. But they are not alone. For the centre of gravity on this issue lies much further towards the conservative end than many people realise.
Dr George Carey, the evangelical former Archbishop of Canterbury, admitted in a Sunday Times interview at the weekend that he had knowingly consecrated two celibate gay bishops. If he could do it with a clear conscience, why not Dr Williams? Meanwhile, at the famously conservative St Mary Abbots church in Kensington last Sunday, the Rev Gillean Craig preached an excellent sermon in support of Dr John. One father took his children out, but the rest of the congregation spontaneously applauded him at the end: the first time he has won an ovation in 25 years of preaching.
The people who are holding Dr Williams to ransom are a small and unrepresentative minority in the Church of England. They are doing the Church inestimable damage. To the outside world, it now appears bigoted, homophobic and downright nasty. The institution has probably sunk lower in public esteem than the Conservative Party ever did.
This is a tragedy for an organisation that has just appointed a leader with an unusual talent for reaching out to wider society. Dr Williams had the opportunity to speak to people’s thirst for spirituality, to bring more of the 72 per cent of the population who claim to be Christian back to worship. Why now would they want to engage with an institution that so rages against the values of the modern world, and does so in a vindictive and inhumane manner? Why would they want to join a Church that has become obsessed in an unhealthy and faintly repellent way with what should be a completely marginal matter compared with the big issues of poverty, cruelty and injustice? If they had any sense, Anglicans would stop worrying about bums in beds and start worrying about bums on seats.
maryann.sieghart@thetimes.co.uk
