Now that I have outed myself as a person of unsame-sex orientation, and a person of a minority faith, some of you breathe a cautious sigh of relief, while for others the confession discredits everything I am about to say. But the discussion we are inviting through the launch of this book, Beyond Stereotypes: Christians and Homosexuality, is a discussion worth having. Indeed I believe it is a discussion we need to have in Australia, and especially in Sydney, at this time. You be the judge.
In a recent episode of The Simpsons, Springfield's mayor calls for ideas to promote tourism, and Lisa Simpson suggests allowing same-sex marriages. The idea is approved and Springfield becomes the place to be for same-sex couples to get married. When Rev Lovejoy refuses to perform the ceremonies, Homer Simpson becomes a certified minister via the Internet. He marries all the gay couples in town and then starts to marry anything to anything else.
Patty (Marge's spinster sister) wants to marry her partner Veronica, a pro-golfer. Marge cannot accept that her sister is a lesbian, and discovers that Veronica is actually a man. Just in time, the wedding is stopped, and when Leslie Robin Swisher (aka Veronica) proposes that he and Patty marry anyway, Patty declines because she believes she is only attracted to girls.
We live in a liquid society where the rules and boundaries for negotiating conventions on sexuality, gender, and living arrangements are fluid. There are growing calls from lobby groups, government, educational institutions and some churches for the recognition of homosexual rights and even same-sex marriage. Institutions apply affirmative action policies for employment of those who identify as homosexual.
Homosexual rights are frequently viewed in the same way that human rights pertaining to race and gender are now viewed, and some see this as the new frontline of the civil rights movement.
Christian voices, among them evangelical voices, speak into this liquid space, and attempt to construct and model a responsive Christian community, with mixed results.
Evangelicals are in two minds about homosexuality. Evangelicals have a high view of biblical authority, seeking divine wisdom through Scripture. They regard the gospel events as literal and central to life, and so they seek to convert others to the way of Jesus. And they are actively involved in congregational life and in the wider world, seeking personal and structural transformation.
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your orientation), the Bible makes no comment on homosexual orientation, but it condemns homosexual practice. The only form of non-coercive sexual behaviour in ancient Israel, early Judaism and early Christianity regarded as more abhorrent than homosexual sex was bestiality.
In the New Testament, Jesus said nothing about homosexual practice, but his teaching on marriage presupposed exclusively male-female sexual relationships (e.g. Mk 10:5-9), and his opposition to sexual immorality would likely have included opposition to the offences in the Holiness Code in Leviticus.
Paul, however, declared homosexual practice to be ungodly. He described it as "unnatural" (Rom 1:18-27, referring to both gay and lesbian sex), incompatible with a Christian lifestyle (1 Cor 6:9-11), and an affront to God's law and gospel (1 Tim 1:8-11).
Some biblical and historical scholars argue that the key words and phrases used of homosexual practice in Scripture can admit other meanings. But it's not just about dirt, greed and pleasure, or sexual justice. In my view, and that of evangelical statesman John Stott,
the Christian rejection of homosexual practices does not rest on 'a few isolated and obscure proof texts' (as is sometimes said), whose traditional explanation can (perhaps) be overthrown. For the negative prohibitions of homosexual practices in Scripture make sense only in the light of its positive teaching in Genesis 1 and 2 about human sexuality and heterosexual marriage.
American New Testament scholar Richard Hays observes that, for some Christian theologians and pastors,
the Bible is seen as a source of oppression and blindness; … for such interpreters, the most crucial question about the moral teaching of the New Testament is how we can get critical leverage against it. Such forthright repudiation of biblical authority … is a historical phenomenon that is both relatively recent and unlikely to exercise any lasting influence within the church.
The conclusions to which one is drawn on the issue of homosexual practice will often be determined by cultural as well as biblical influences.
It makes a great deal of difference whether one begins with experience and then interprets tradition and Scripture in the light of that experience, or whether one begins with biblical exegesis and interpretation and then examines experience in the light of this. The ethical theories to which one consciously or unconsciously subscribes will also guide judgment. Whether one is personally familiar with gay and/or lesbian persons may also be a factor in determining one's stance.
The fundamental issue on which everything else in this debate turns is biblical hermeneutics. We want to express Christian love to all people. We affirm gay people as persons. We don't shun. We don't hate. But for many evangelicals, full acceptance of gay and lesbian relationships, and unconditional support for their asserted rights, is incompatible with a high view of biblical authority.
How we deliberate on questions of sexual conduct ultimately depends on whether we view the ancient text, or contemporary experience, as the preeminent locus of authority for moral decision making.
It may be prudent, as Moore College ethicist Andrew Cameron has suggested, for the two sides in this battle Рthe homosexual community and the evangelical community Рto agree to cultural and political d̩tente:
We are two communities who will never agree. We are stuck with each other in Australian society. Each community battles for hearts and minds; each has its articles of faith; and we both have the capacity to hurt each other terribly. Neither community will disappear any time soon. The tensions we experience have to be addressed the way liberal democracies traditionally navigate profound disagreements of conscience: through free speech and freedom of assembly. By all means let us continue to try persuading each other, but at the same time, let us also seek to live well alongside each other in a civil society that we can all share, in 'critical tolerance', where we accept one another even while disagreeing.
Therein lies a sensible way forward. We may never be persuaded by the other side's arguments and stories and statistics. Nor they of ours. But all of us need to be open to new light – from Scripture, from our respective theological and philosophical traditions, from scientific and sociological findings, and from human experience.
This book, Beyond Stereotypes: Christians and Homosexuality, offers a fresh appraisal of the contours of the current debate. It is honest and succinct. It is thoughtful and provocative. It's like a can opener on the issues in dispute. And it opens a door to the difficult path of dialogue and awareness and understanding that lies before us as evangelical Christians.
I close with some wise and characteristically optimistic words from the late Baptist theologian and ethicist Stanley Grenz:
Christians are compelled to accept and acknowledge persons, regardless of lifestyle, as objects of God's compassion, concern, and love … For Christians of either sexual orientation, the call to live out one's sexuality in ways that bring honor to God is a difficult challenge, especially in the midst of our permissive society. Yet, the resources of the Holy Spirit are greater than the difficulty of the calling, and obedience to the divine design is the path of greater joy."