The Bishop of Bradford said today he would not knowingly appoint an actively gay priest to his diocese.

The Right Reverend David James, pictured, refuelled the Church of England gay debate by declaring: "Sexual activity belongs within a marriage and the context of family life."

The Bishop said he had no regrets about being one of nine bishops who signed the open letter criticising the controversial appointment of Canon Jeffrey John as Bishop of Reading.

The issue has caused a storm within the church as Canon John has been in a gay relationship for 20 years, although he says he is now celibate.

The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams has written to all 38 Church of England bishops asking them to refocus on the issues that matter such as war, disease, poverty and instability.

But Bishop David today argued that being actively homosexual was contrary to the Bible and said Canon John's appointment was "too bold" for the Church of England at the moment.

He said the issue was not about being the church being anti-gay.

"This is about actively gay clergy - not about lay people, not about people with homosexual orientation," he said. "It is not appropriate for clergy to behave in that way. There are parts of the Bible which I would defend in which it states that sexual intercourse between people with the same sex is contrary to the way God created us, to our human sexuality and to our primary purpose of our sexuality."

He said being actively gay for a priest would be the same professional hypocrisy as being dishonest if you were a politician or breaking the law for a policeman.

"We look to the clergy to set standards in all sorts of behaviour. A chief constable would sack a police officer for breaking the law.

"If a politician who talks about family values is disloyal to his wife he will be criticised. Yet we all fail in some ways and God forgives us."

Asked if homosexuality was a failure for a clergyman, he replied: "In terms of activity not in terms of orientations."

And he added: "I have my sins but they are too boring to tell."

Asked if he would appoint a gay clergyman to his diocese, he said: "I would not knowingly appoint an actively gay priest.

"I do not look through bedroom curtains. I would only know if they told me."

He added: "I have known two clergy living together without any suspicions when I shared with two men as a young, single student.

"What we have lost, and we all suffer for this, is the acceptance that people of the same sex can be friends without being in a sexual relationship.

"The Bishop (of Reading) isn't. That is fine. I am not interested in hunting out people. I accept what people tell me."

He said Canon John's appointment came at the time when the issue was still being debated.

"It races against agreements which were made in 1998," he said. "I want the debate to continue. I think the nomination was too bold a statement. That is not where the Church of England is at the moment.

"The church is not at that point where a prominent gay priest should be made a bishop - to a position of such prominence."

But he added: "To reverse it is to make another statement which is too extreme the other way."

He denied his views were old-fashioned and intolerant, saying he had had lots of letters of support from people - including young people who were worried about sexual permissiveness.

"There is a certain unease in the general sexual climate. There is a permissiveness and abuse of God's gift of sex commercially by the media," he said.

"It gives the impression it is recreational activity and there for anyone.

"But many people are unfulfilled - many elderly people and the young who are not ready to be sexually active. But the pressure is on them to become so. This is what is wrong.

"There is inappropriate behaviour among heterosexuals as well. Heterosexuals who see it as recreational rather than an expression of loving commitment."

He said faithful homosexual/lesbian activity was more acceptable than casual heterosexual activity.

He also revealed that his decision to sign the open letter had caused him to receive some "very unpleasant" letters.

"I do not regret it but it has been painful since. While there have been letters in support, some of the letters have been very unpleasant - painful, not threatening."

He said their letter was expressing the same concerns as the Archbishop but were in a "slightly different position to him."

But while supporting more debate, he added: " I am not sure if the Church of England will ever be in a position to ordain actively gay clergy."