c. 2000 Religion News Service

(Tom Ehrich is a writer and computer consultant, managing large-scale database implementations. An Episcopal priest, he lives in Durham, N.C.)

(UNDATED) Two weeks ago, an Episcopal pastor from South Carolina and a seminary dean from Pittsburgh went to Singapore and were ordained bishops. Leading the consecration were the archbishops of Rwanda and of South East Asia.

The newly elevated returned to the United States vowing to save the Episcopal Church and return it to orthodoxy, especially in matters of sexual ethics.

To people outside the Episcopal fold, this must seem odd behavior, akin perhaps to an American basketball player’s choosing to play professional ball in Italy: not quite the major league but still a salary. To many Episcopalians, the Singapore events seem a sorry reminder that sex still dominates discourse. To a few, the very order of the church was under assault _ or, by another point of view, was being saved.

I hesitate to label the two clergy. They seem to hope for the label “traditionalist,” which in Episcopal cosmology guarantees the moral high ground. But that label seems a stretch. Which “tradition”? The 1950s cultural consensus on when and how sex could occur? The Reformation tradition of intellectual freedom? Henry VIII’s decision that church teachings on sex ranked far behind public policy? Earlier traditions in which nonconformists were flogged outside the church door?

Do they mean the tradition of Jesus himself, who said hardly a word about sex and devoted his life to breaking down cultural and religious barriers so all could come nigh to God?

Or are they picking up selected stones from the Old Testament _ ignoring less savory attitudes about bigamy, menstruation, adultery and infertility, long since abandoned by the faithful, and missing the point of the Sodom story?

The label “conservative” does injustice to true conservatism. “Right-wing” comes to mind in a month that saw Nazi sympathizers join the government in Austria. But that overstates the clerics’ xenophobia.

The dean/bishop’s seminary claims the mantle “evangelical,” as if to say anyone who took the Bible seriously would adopt their narrow moral theology. But that’s an abuse not only of evangelical tradition, but of God’s word.

So no labels. Instead, a lament, grounded, by gosh, in Scripture.

On his first visit to Capernaum, Jesus taught and healed, and people were astounded. They begged him for more. But when the disciples brought him the people’s plea that he stay, Jesus said, “Let us go on.” The message, he said, must be proclaimed in other places as well.

In the next town, Jesus began ministering to outcasts. When he returned to Capernaum, he was changed. He called a tax collector into his inner circle. He dined with those whom the religious rejected. He spoke against the religious establishment for being fastidious in doctrine and ritual but cold of heart.

When the religious leaders fired back, quoting Scripture against him, “he looked at them with anger and was grieved at their hardness of heart,” according to Mark.

Two points in this. One is that Jesus changed. He moved on. Because he was weak-willed or uncertain of sight? No, because the gospel is dynamic, not static. Jesus changed because of what he experienced.

Second, there is always a tension between those who want Jesus to stay and his determination to keep moving. Whatever moment one enshrines as having been perfect _ today, yesterday or long ago _ the gospel fact seems to lie in what Jesus said when asked to remain in Capernaum: “Let us go on.”

The Singapore few need to do what Jesus did, namely, look around at the world as it is. Back in Africa, people are dying of AIDS _ of the heterosexual variety _ not of inadequate sexual theology. In Southeast Asia, a few are becoming extravagantly wealthy while common folk work cheap making shoes for Nike.

In South Carolina, the dividing line is race, and the most disturbing social phenomenon may be the flood of wealthy retirees turning the coastline into shelters of privilege. Pittsburgh is reeling from steel’s demise and the new feudalism of high-tech winners and losers.

We heap coals on our heads, not by bad sex, but by that “hardness of heart” that fixates on narrow piety and ignores the suffering of God’s people.

DEA END EHRICH