Musings 2002/157

That hilarious TV presentations Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister, are brilliant comedies and have no equal in the entertainment field. The books published on the same comedies are also unique.
I have just completed Yes Prime Minister, Vol. 1, printed in 1986, and certainly, the insightful yet tragic comedy - it being most likely based on facts - still draw up the periodical laughter and pure joy, as  the Margaret Thatcher once said.
However, on the matter of the Prime Minister choosing (recommending) the new C. of E. Bishop for Bury St. Edmunds, although still comical, I was somewhat disturbed at some of the statements.
For example, Sir Humphrey, in answer to a question regarding one of the names put up for consideration for Bury St. Edmunds, said:  In the Church of England the word modernist is code for non-believer.
The discussion that followed, went on:
P An atheist? I asked in surprise.
Oh no, Prime Minister, he replied wickedly. An atheist clergy-man couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So when they stop believing in God they call themselves modernists.
I was staggered. How can the Church of England recommend an atheist as Bishop of Bury St. Edmunds?
Humphrey crossed his legs and sipped his drink. Very easily, he smiled. The Church of England is primarily a social organisation, not a religious one. P
Further down on the same page (220) the conversation gets around to the status of being a Bishop, who no longer wore cassocks and gaiters, which were out of style.
We read:
P I wondered why cassocks and gaiters are now out of style.
The church is trying to be more relevant, said Humphrey.
To God? I asked.
Of course not, Prime Minister. I meant relevant in sociological terms.
What he was saying, in effect, is that the ideal candidate from the church's point of view is a cross between a socialite and a socialist. P
And on the next page, the conversation continues thus:
P Humphrey smiled at me. Isn't it interesting how nowadays politicians talk about morals and bishops talk about politics?
He's right. Bernard gave us an example from Stanford's career. He designed a new church in south London. On the plans there were places for dispensing orange juice, and family planning, and  organised demonstrations - but no place for Holy Communion. He added, in all fairness, that there was a dual-purpose hall in which a service could be held.
I asked my two officials if the church approved of this design.
Oh yes, said Humphrey. You see, the church is run by theologians.
What does that mean? I asked.
Well, he smiled, theology's a device for helping agnostics stay within the church. P
But the amazing chuck-off goes on, page 222, as follows:
P Even if one candidate wants to get God out of the Church of England and the other wants to get the Queen out of it?
The Queen, said Humphrey, is inseparable from the Church of England.
Is she? I asked. And what about God?
I think He is what is called an optional extra, replied my Permanent Secretary, finishing off his drink. P
So there you go!
It is amazing how we find humour in being informed of virtually factual occurrences which are, of themselves, extremely obnoxious and acutely insulting not only to many of the people involved but to the particular nation as well - not to forget the Church!
While the story is focused around the Church of England, the general remarks certainly apply to The Catholic Church in many instances.
Socialism is certainly rife amongst Catholic clergy, even though The Church has condemned it! Indeed, many are supporters of the banned liberation theology, which is a cross breeding of communism and Catholicism. Naturally, when Catholicism is cross bred, its Doctrines begin to be watered down and even discarded.