The Way Forward?
Christian Voices on Homosexuality and the Church
By Timothy Bradshaw (Editor)
Hodder & Stoughton. 229 pages. £8.99
ISBN 0 340 69393 2
The Church of England Evangelical Council invited a group of senior evangelical theologians to write a position statement on sexuality.
This group, responding most immediately to the House of Bishops' report, 'Issues in Human Sexuality', but also to wider cultural trends affecting all denominations, produced 'The St. Andrew's Day Statement', which managed in very brief compass to be theologically profound, pastorally sensitive and ethically conservative. However, it cried out for exposition (it is notoriously opaque in places) and for open discussion. That latter task is what The Way Forward? attempts. Note the question mark in the title.
The St. Andrew's Day group has opened itself to a wide range of criticisms. Gerald Bray accuses it of lack of clear definition over 'the gospel' and 'marriage', giving too many hostages to fortune, and Simon Vibert hints that academic caution makes the Statement inaccessible to most Christians. Both are, however, supporters of the Statement's traditionalist conclusions. Jeffrey John, Michael Vasey and Elizabeth Stuart, together make their differing cases for the acceptability of homosexual partnerships.
Jeffrey John simply argues in the opposite direction that life-long, stable and covenanted are as valid as (though not the same as) heterosexual marriage. Michael Vasey builds on his arguments in Strangers and Friends that same-sex friendships are an important biblical category that evangelicals too often ignore, and hence miss what same-sex friendships offer (for him, gay sex falls into the Reformation category of 'adiaphora', 'things indifferent', which I think would surprise the author of the Homilies). Elizabeth Stuart seems to argue in a similar way for friendship, but where Vasey notes 'many points of convergence' (p.61) between himself and the Statement, Stuart notes the 'radically different starting-points' (p.80) between herself and the Statement. This should alert us to our potential sloppy thinking: there is not a single 'gay Lobby' with a single set of arguments.
Responding to those who think that Romans 1 is right but not relevant to today's cultural phenomena is a different exercise to responding to those who think it is wrong and therefore irrelevant. We should also be alert to the propaganda value of the Statement: Vasey clearly wants to be as close to it as possible, while John and Stuart define themselves over against it. Anyone seeking to understand the contemporary pressure to change the evangelical mind on the subject of homosexuality should read these three essays with particular care.
Other essays respond to different parts of the report and it would be impossible to review them all. The case for cautious revision is put by Rowan Williams, the exposition of the Statement's deeper theological structure is put by Oliver O'Donovan, and other essays call for clarification, or give pastoral or psychological insights.
Thorough and fascinating
However, it is the two concluding essays which have, for me, the most importance. Anthony Thiselton puts his hermeneutical expertise to work on the principal biblical texts in the debate, to see whether the case for a revised reading has been made. Once one has worked past his opening pages on contemporary hermeneutical theory, his work on the text is thorough and fascinating. Although he returns open verdicts on all the Old Testament texts and Romans 1, his arguments that both 1 Corinthians 6 and 1 Timothy 1.10 mean what they say on the surface is both rigorous and seminal. He has read everything that matters and his conclusion that revisionist readings have failed must be given weight - the texts are not ambiguous and must be given the right to speak.
His chapter contained the only typographical error I noticed, where the sub-heading on page 161 gives the wrong chapter from 1 Corinthians.
The last essay is by the chairman of the St. Andrew's Day group, Timothy Bradshaw, and he attempts the multi-faceted task of elucidating the Statement where it was alleged to be unclear, defending its theology where it has been attacked and counter-attacking some of the preceding essays, making a critique of the 'Issues' report, attempting to summarise the state of play in the debate and to enquire if there is still a way forward. It is a clear, stylish and provocative essay which makes an attractive and coherent case for engaging in courteous debate whilst retaining the (until now) orthodox position.
Bradshaw is to be congratulated on a very important book which is clear, contemporary, charitable and challenging. No reader could agree with all the essays, but should finish with a clearer understanding of a variety of incompatible views. It deserves the widest possible circulation. My fear is that the writers demonstrate such fundamentally divergent approaches to Scripture and experience, that a dialogue which results in anything other than disagreement over even the gospel fundamentals, is impossible. The title's question mark is sadly necessary.
Chris Green
Tolworth
Home
Archives
Subscriptions
Adverts
Find a church
About us
Contact us
Site Map
Printable