Coming a bit late to this thread. Nevertheless, there are two points I want to make, being someone raised CofE and still Anglican (although abroad now).
- Yes, the priest broke the rules. So what. Right now, ordained CofE clergy who are gay are being put into a false position. If the bishops of the Church refuse to deal with the issue properly, acts of civil disobedience like this are completly appropriate in my opinion.
- Christianity is about following Christ. The clue is in the name. It is not Biblianity. CofE doctrine has never been based solely on the Bible. Since Elizabethan times it has been based on three sources: Scripture, reason and tradition. The Bible is very important, but what it says is not to be accepted uncritically. Nor is it appropriate to leave one's rationality at the door. It is quite appropriate to take into account what science tells us. I like the way it was put in something I read this morning:
"..it has been drawn to the realisation of some of us that for centuries most Christians have been critical of a group of people about whom Jesus made no criticism at all. They are the people whom science now assures us were born the way they are".
So it isn't against principle for the CofE to change its mind and accept same-sex relationships fully, as I trust it will eventually do. Nevertheless, it seems to me that the CofE (and Anglican churches generally) are seen as the Lib Dems of churches: unprincipled and trying to be all things to all people. Well, I will say two things to that.
- A church's first duty is to be there for people, not just to insist they all believe the same stuff.
- Those who base their objections on the Bible are putting themselves in even more of a false position than gay CofE clergy, for reasons given above. After all, I don't observe any of them saying that gays should be put to the sword. They should be honest with themselves and - like the Anglicans - be explicit in that they don't accept every bit of the Bible. Such people should also reflect on the fact that it was the Church who decided what books to include in the Bible, and they did so having worked out what to believe. Plenty of books were left out. Doctrine came first, then the Bible.
- Conservatives from other (ie, Roman Catholic) backgrounds have the same problem. Because they believe Church teaching can never be in error, they are unable to admit they got this one wrong, even if they are so inclined. They should reflect on the fact that their churches teach very different stuff to 500 years ago. Their churches have just never admitted to being wrong about any of it. Why not be honest?
As for my own reasons for being supportive of the Church blessing same-sex marriages, it's simple. I have known plenty of gay Christians who reflect Christ to me. Clearly their sexual orientation - and relationships - don't get in the way of this.
Also it puts me in the same camp as Desmond Tutu, who fought prejudice all his life and hence knows it when he sees it.