Our PB at Southwark

I am going to assume that you readers are following the news. I will assume that you know +Rowan (or someone higher than him at Lambeth Palace*) forbade +KJS to function or vest as a bishop, and that he (or someone higher than him at Lambeth Palace*) forbade her to wear the mitre that a bishop would generally wear. You can find relevant posts on Twitter or in the blogosphere by searching “mitregate.”

Now … mind you … I’m not going to get all hung up on whether or not a bishop gets to wear a silly hat … or what kind of hat she or he gets to wear. [BTW, Laura cracked me up with this one.]

But it is curious that the Archbishop of Canterbury (or someone higher than him at Lambeth Palace*) had no problem with Presiding Bishop Griswold appearing in full episcopal regalia at Southwark in 2006 . . . but then ordered +KJS not to vest as a bishop at Southwark Cathedral this past Sunday.

What is the difference? Is it merely gender? Or is +Rowan really trying to infuriate the Episcopal Church (U.S.), as Father Jake wonders.

Other bloggers were way ahead of me when they posted and commented on the sermon our Presiding Bishop delivered at Southwark. It didn’t strike me at the time, but now it does. Now I know that +Rowan Williams (or someone higher than him at Lambeth Palace*) made her submit proof of her ordination yet again, and now I know that he (or someone higher than him at Lambeth Palace*) forbade her to vest as a bishop.

So this sentence from her Southwark sermon sounds a bit different to my ears than it did before. She said:

It’s hard work to get to the point where you’re able and willing to see the Lord of love in the odorous street person next to you in the pew. It can be just as hard to find him in the unwelcoming host.

Simon the Pharisee was Jesus’ “unwelcoming host” in last Sunday’s Gospel. But – to my ear – Rowan Williams was the “unwelcoming host” to Katharine Jefferts Schori in Southwark last weekend. It seems to me that +Rowan is giving the Pharisees a run for their money.

Of course, I will never know what +KJS meant by that “unwelcoming host” reference – whether it was only a biblical reference or a reference to current events. But it seems to me that the shoe fits the Archbishop of Canterbury very well.

I am also struck by this comment at Thinking Anglicans, from a person who was at Southwark:

I have been wondering since Sunday why +Katherine carried her mitre over her heart during the Mass at Southwark. Was it her silent and dignified protest on behalf of the dignity of women and the Church that elected her, and continues to thank God that we did so?
Posted by: karen macqueen+ on Tuesday, 15 June 2010 at 5:07pm BST

I have seen photographs of +Katherine carrying the mitre under her arm, but that is the only comment I have seen that said she carried it “over her heart” at some point in the service. I hope it is true. For it would speak volumes against the tyranny of the man who is trying to morph into Pope Rowan I.

What do you make of this?

* The reason I added "or someone higher than him at Lambeth Palace" is that Ruth Gledhill is reporting that "'Lambeth Palace are [sic] investigating the way the leader of The Episcopal Church was treated in Britain this week ...." Apparently "Lambeth Palace" is investigating why "Lambeth Palace" behaved in this way toward Bishop Jefferts Shori. Solipsism, much? ....

June 18 addendum: It may be that I'm indebted to Grandmère Mimi for that insight. I visited many sites yesterday, including hers, and it's possible that her comment is what inspired my "or someone higher" snark/question/insight.