So +Michael Scott-Joynt has added his comments in an article in this weeks Church of England Newspaper. It is, of course, a free country and, thankfully, he can say what he likes (though I gather +Rowan has complained about the liberal 'chattering classes').
His statement, following +Tom Wright of Durham, has made me realise that, because of the way they come to their authority as bishops, they can speak for no one but themselves. We didn't choose them - the People of God did not elect them - so who do they represent? The power they have is that of position and influence: I wish I might say their charism, but that would require their appointment to be by a process of discernment by the Church. Whatever +Michael and +Tom say about the Episcopal Church, at least their bishops speak with the authority of the People of God who elected them.
I have come to sense that the Church of England is still a feudal fiefdom of the bishops. I wonder when +Michael listened to the voice of gay and lesbian Christians? My experience of him is that he has never truly 'listened' for his mind has been made up on the subject for many, many years. No theological arguments (or imaginative insights) can touch him, I regret. His voice, as always, only speaks for what he regards as 'orthodox Christianity'.
Who was it said, "There's none so blind as those who will not see" ...