It was demonstrated, for me, by the response made by the Bishop of Beverly, +Martyn Jarrett, when asked by Radio 4 what his response would be to losing the vote in Synod: “We would have to decide what God wants us to do…” How often has the stubborn impasse, “It’s not me who disagrees with you; it’s God” been used?

It’s just not a valid argument – it isn’t even a recourse to valid theology. It’s a flat claim that there is only one way to interpret text & follow teaching with an absolute rejection of evaluation, dissent or difference of opinion.

This wouldn’t be such a huge problem if it wasn’t based upon a selective interpretation of the Old Testament, cherry picking which texts to uphold at any cost while conveniently ignoring the ones that don’t suit certain agendas. At least the “liberal” arguments can claim to have hermeneutical and scholastic integrity, which these “literal” arguments cannot. At least they don’t redefine Paul’s use of the words “malachoi” and “arsenokoitai” to reject their contemporary use.

When it comes to reading & understanding the Bible, historical context, linguistic subtlety and anthropological settings are everything; an informed reading demonstrates this by showing how these scholarly methods help us to see the common truth in otherwise contradictory passages.

I have little sympathy for traditions of literalism that reject without consideration the Hebrew grammar and vocabulary of Genesis just because it undermines 7 Day Creationism; less sympathy when they reject out of hand the demonstrable pagan context of Leviticus’ objections to homosexual acts in polytheist sects; and no sympathy at all when they start to redefine Paul’s clearly understood Greek to suit their purposes.

Of course, if they wanted to talk about homosexuality and women bishops with reference to theological matters, that would be a different thing entirely. There are valid arguments against both of them (not that I agree with those arguments, but that is another thing) yet they have been rejected in favour of willfully blind & deaf dogmatism.

but then speaking as a Baptist / independent, who needs bishops anyway! So it doesn’t really matter whether they are male, female, gay, celibate or living in palaces like they used to or in Council estates as the very best might do today.