Church and gay question

May the Church gives its blessing to homosexual partnerships and remain true to the will of God? Still be faithful in its witness to the love of God as shown in Jesus and revealed in the Bible?

As a minimum it seems to me this is an open question. That is, even if you are reluctant to give a definitive “yes” in answer, then neither can you give a definitive “no”. The reasons for this I explain below.

If it is an open question, then isn’t the only proper response of all Christians who take seriously the ethic of love for neighbour, especially bishops and church leaders, compassion and respect between those with differing answers? For me this means learning from and listening to others; accepting, not condemning, those who in good faith and conscience want to go ahead and affirm homosexual relationships; as well as those who, also in good faith, genuinely believe this can never be an option for a faithful Church.

This much might be agreed by all Christians who have not allowed their party-line allegiances to cloud their spiritual discernment. But can it be shown that this is an open question?

I have several reasons why I think it is.

Firstly, “facts on the ground”. Clearly there are many Christians, homosexual and not, who already believe that homosexual partnerships may be good and right in the sight of God. But these may be false teachers. The New Testament itself warns against those who will lead the Church astray with spurious beliefs. But the errors the New Testament speaks of are central points of faith such as the adequacy of God’s grace in Christ. We are also taught that by their fruits you shall know them. Where there are Christian men and women who are faithful members of the Church and who clearly reveal in their lives the fruits of God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ and differ from Christian brothers and sisters in no other way than that they answer “yes” to our question then how can they be regarded as false teachers?

Secondly, our greater knowledge of the human condition. The findings of various branches of science and the personal experiences of many people suggests very strongly that homosexuality is a given feature of human life.

Thirdly, the development of understanding of the biblical texts. Whilst it may be clear that there is very little in the biblical tradition to support a positive assessment of homosexual partnerships, and much to endorse the traditional Christian antipathy, it is not clear that the biblical material should be determinative of a developed Christian ethic for the 21st century.

Fourthly, the development of positive aspects of sexual ethics in public life. Many religiously motivated critics of homosexual partnership consider it to be part of a wider decline in sexual mores in Western society. But this ignores the evidence for many positive changes in relation to more traditional cultures. Modern intolerance of rape, of domestic violence, of child abuse and of forced marriages shows that the so-called decadence of Western societies actually displays many strongly moral developments in recent decades.

Therefore in my view there is no case for condemnation on religious grounds of those who believe sincerely that homosexual partnerships may be a faithful Christian expression of human love and companionship

The Church of England's true colours

This week's edition of the left-leaning current affairs magazine New Statesman has an article about homosexuality and the Church of England; marking the departure of Richard Kirker from the leadership of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM). There is criticism of liberals in the Church for not standing alongside homosexuals and leaving the field open for conservatives to set the agenda with devastating results for gay clergy. The article claims Kirker is leaving disillusioned and yet also quotes him as knowing that it would be more than a lifetime's work to bring about change on this issue. Kirker is also quoted as offering the positive view that it has been necessary to reveal the true colours of the conservatives on this issue if this issue is to be genuinely resolved.

US diocese splits from Episcopal church over gay issue

The US Diocese of San Joaquin, California has decided to split from the Episcopal Church over the issue of homosexuality.It will become a diocese in the Iglesia Anglicana del Cono Sur de America.This has been reported across the globe. Yet it is worth keeping this in perspective. This diocese has a mere 8,800 members. That's not quite three times bigger than my deanery, which is just one of 29 deaneries in our Diocese of Oxford, England. And I don't imagine all the members of the Diocese of San Joaquin will feel the same way either. These are small numbers of deeply conservative communities.

Slavery, Sexuality and the Inclusive Community

Richard Burridge, Dean of King's College London has delivered the Eric Symes Abbott Memorial Lecture 2007 on the biblical roots of the church as an inclusive community. This demonstrates further that there are senior evangelicals who want to dialogue on the subject of homosexuality in the church and want to engage in that dialogue with lesbian and gay members of the Church.

Why do conservatives face both ways?

It interests me to hear that the Roman Catholic hierarchy in England wants its adoption agency to be exempted, on the grounds of conscience, from the provisions of the Equality Act which would disallow discrimination against homosexuals in the provision of goods and services. They are protesting against the application of the Act to the adoption agency run by their church. They say today that the agency will close because in all conscience it cannot accept the placement of children with homosexual couples as this is contrary to the tenets of its faith. I have a lot of sympathy for the Roman Catholic case here - not because I think homosexual couples should be discriminated against, nor do I think that they are unsuitable to adopt children; but because I believe that faith-based conscience should be respected and diversity of belief and practice in these matters tolerated. (It would be a different matter if the Roman Catholic church controlled all adoption agencies but there is a wide range of other agencies available to homosexual couples.)

But what interests me is the character of the conservative religious mindset in this issue. The Roman Catholic hierarchy and conservative Anglicans may not be the same groups of people but they have a similarly conservative and negative view of homosexuality in practice. But whilst the Roman Catholic hierarchy seeks exemption from secular equality law on the basis of conscience; there is no such "exemption" apparently granted by conservative Anglicans to the United States Episcopal Church which in all conscience wants to offer full equality of membership to homosexuals in its church community. Conservatives thus face two ways - exemption from laws for themselves on matters of conscience but no exemption on matters of conscience for those with whom they disagree. Didn't Jesus once say "Do unto others as you would have then do unto you" ?