I have had it brought to my attention that the Church of England has appointed a Naked Bishop. I have posted the link as it was supplied to me by Young Keith, the son of the soi-disant Archdruid Eileen. I have not followed the link as there is a severe danger, as it seems to me, of a picture of the Naked Bishop being shown on the computer screen. Since I have eschewed modern technology, and am still using a PC running Windows 3.3 to access the Internet, you might argue that the resolution would not be such as to have a degrading effect on a respected and mature Independent Baptist minister. But I should not take the chance. After all, were I to catch a glimpse of a Naked Bishop I would have to destroy the browser history on my Netscape Navigator.
Young Keith is no stranger to encouraging nudity, I should point out. Every winter, he convinces a group of the Beaker Folk's deluded pilgrims that dancing naked on Aspley Heath is a key part of the Beaker religion. Every year his uncle, the police officer, has the job of rounding them up, threatening them with criminal charges, and then releasing them on the grounds that it "will not stand up in court." This makes Young Keith laugh, although I do not understand why. He is maybe nervous about discussing such matters. Understandable. I do not feel comfortable, myself.
Keith tells me that the Daily Mail quotes Rev George Curry, as saying that nakedness is to be kept within man and wife except for medical emergencies. I would however disagree with this esteemed churchman. For why single out emergencies? Either nakedness is required in a medical situation or it is not. The only situation I can imagine where full-scale nakedness might be involved in a medical emergency - and not a medical non-emergency - is one where man and wife were involved in the first instance. I will say no more. Though I may go for a brisk walk.
I need hardly remind my readers that naked bishops, like any other kind of naked person, are an offence unto to the Lord. For was David's naked dancing not accounted naughty unto the Lord? At any rate, his wife was offended by his nudely cavorting, and if his behaviour was such that the Little Woman considered it wrong, then we can assume it was at the very least not edifying. For does not the Book of Proverbs not teach us that women, albeit kept under strict regulation as to their spheres of influence, can have judgement and discernment?
I should stress that, even between man and wife, since Eden nakedness should have been strictly on a limited basis. For Adam and Eve were alone in the Garden - and yet they were already ashamed of their nakedness. So in order not to be an offence unto my eyes, Marjory has ensured that I have not seen her naked since we were married. Indeed, my concern regarding the Lord's loathing of the naked form is such that I ensure I wear a bathing costume in the bath, lest even the Divine Eye should look upon my form and be displeased.
In short, the appointment of a Naked Bishop - and a woman at that - is just the kind of liberal, godless, pagan action I would expect from the Church of England. I am told that the Daily Mail is not specific on the circumstances under which we would expect this Naked Bishop to be naked. Which I infer to mean that she will be naked on a fairly regular basis. I suppose she will keep the rules of the Church of England with respect to liturgical wear, however. It would be entirely in keeping with the Anglican Church's mixture of heathenism and Popery for her to be fully dressed in Papistical finery for liturgical activity, and naked for weekday events.
As I say, I am not surprised. The rot started when the Puritans were excluded. Naked Bishops are just the latest inch down the Slippery Slope. Oh Cranmer, you would weep.