Three Challenges to the Church
* Social and Cultural Change
* Personal and Pastoral Experience
* Past and Present Failings

What is the challenge?: The reality
* There are now in Western (and increasingly in non-Western) societies:
* a significant number of people
* who, in so far as they know themselves, their loves, their sexual desires and their intimate relationships,
* believe that they are not fitted for marriage to someone of the opposite sex.
* In contrast to the past, many of these now wish to identify themselves publicly as ‘homosexual', ‘gay' or ‘lesbian'.

What is the challenge?: The question
* Many, including some who are Christians,
* also believe they will flourish best by committing themselves to share their life with someone of the same sex
* in some form of special, loving, covenantal, sexual relationship akin to marriage.
* The question is: How is the church to respond to this new phenomenon and to the people most affected by it, not just those who identify as gay or lesbian but their families and friends?

How to Respond?
* Temptation EITHER to abandon traditional position OR defend current views unthinkingly
* Nothing wrong with facing challenges and considering if our view might be wrong
* BUT need to stop and think and weigh the challenges
* In particular need to discern what God has to say about this question and do this primarily by reference to the Bible

Did God Really Say?
* Challenge can be genuine seeking after will of God and concern that we have misheard his voice
* Reformation principle that the Church is to be semper reformanda - always being reformed
* Church has misread the Scriptures in different times and places

Did God Really Say?
* Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say..." (Genesis 3.1)
* Danger of question being not sincere quest for truth but challenge and undermining of the Word of God - a temptation.

Eve's Response I
* Challenges the distorted and restrictive statement of God's will
* "Did God really say ‘you must not eat from any tree in the garden?'" (v1)
* "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden..." (v2)
* Do people present God as more limiting than he is in order to make us rebel?

Eve's Response II
* BUT she distorts and makes more restrictive herself
* "But God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die'"
* Do we sometimes present a more accurate account than others but still distort?

Eve's Response III
* Led astray by promise of great consequences - ‘For God knows...your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God' (v5)
* Attracted by what on offer and her desire for it - ‘When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye and also desirable for gaining wisdom...' (v6)
* Disobeyed the command - "...she took some and ate it' (v6)
* Do we get led into disobedience by disbelief about effects and desire for what forbidden?

Eve's Response IV
* Involved someone else in her action - ‘she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it' (v6).
* Experienced partial fulfilment of the serpent's promise - ‘then they eyes of both of them were opened' (v7)
* Apparently God's warnings not fulfilled - ‘when you eat of it you will surely die' (2.17)
* Do we sometimes think our disobedience is justified by the consequences we immediately experience?

Eve's Response V
* Death experienced relationally in relation to each other and to God
* Hiding from each other (v7)
* Hiding from God (v8) whom they are now afraid of (v10)
* Blaming others (v12, v13)
* Suffering pain and struggle (vv14ff)
* Exclusion from Garden (v23-24)

God's Continuing Grace
* In face of disobedience of what He had said...
* God provides for them what they really couldn't provide for themselves - ‘The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them' (v21)
* God prevents them making situation worse (v22)

Summary of Lessons from Garden of Eden
* Is question about what God really said clearly distorting what we know God has said?
* Do we sometimes distort even if we are more ‘orthodox' than others?
* Do we sometimes get led astray by desires and an appeal to immediate consequences which may appear justified initially?
* Can we even when we have disobeyed know God's continuing grace providing for us and preserving us from further sin?

What Does God Really Say?
* What have Christians traditionally said about God's will for us as sexual beings?
* Do the texts on homosexuality really say what Christians have said?: Challenges and Responses
* Is it all just a matter of a few proof-texts telling us what God says?: Acting in the Biblical Drama
* Can God really be saying something different as some claim?: Critiquing the Critic

What have Christians heard God say about sexuality and why?

What Have Christians Said?
‘Either marriage, with complete faithfulness to your partner, or else total abstinence'
C.S Lewis, quoted by House of Bishops in Some Issues in Human Sexuality

Why Have Christians Said This?
5 Core Beliefs

(1) ‘God's intention for human sexual activity has been made known to us primarily in Holy Scripture'

(2) ‘The division of humankind into two distinct but complementary sexes is not something accidental or evil but is, on the contrary, something good established by God himself when he first created the human race'

(3) ‘God ordained that men and women should relate to each other in marriage for the three reasons classically expressed in the marriage service of the BCP'

(4) ‘Sexual union has a legitimate place in the context of marriage'

(5) ‘Because sexual activity has its proper setting within marriage...those who were not married should not engage in any sexual activity at all and that those who were should engage in it only with their spouse'.

All quotes from House of Bishops, Some Issues in Human Sexuality, Section 1.2.

One Implication of These Beliefs
‘Homosexual activity has been consistently condemned within the Christian tradition'
(House of Bishops, SIHS, 1.2.25).

Tradition: Some Conclusions
* View is not just simplistic and fundamentalist proof-texting
* Mainstream, orthodox Christian ethic
* Part of a whole Christian vision of human sexuality
* Changing one part has effects on whole
* But is the tradition biblical?

Challenges and Responses about what God says to us in and through the Bible on homosexuality

What Texts to Study?
* Need to remember big picture
* Genesis 1 & 2
* Jesus in gospels on marriage and sex eg Mt 19
* Paul on marriage eg 1 Cor 7 and Eph 5
* Return to this in next section

On homosexuality - six most commonly cited texts (others could also be used)

The ‘Classic Texts'
* Genesis 19.4-5 - Story of Sodom
* Leviticus 18.22 and 20.13 - ‘Not lie with a male as with a woman'
* 1 Corinthians 6.9-10 - List of sins including two traditionally understood as referring to homosexual practice
* 1 Timothy 1.9-10 - List of sins contrary to Law and Gospel
* Romans 1.18ff (esp vv26-27) - Description of God's judgment on human rebellion including God ‘giving them up' so they ‘exchange natural intercourse for unnatural'

What Do We Learn From These Texts?
* All of them speak negatively about homosexual practices - the Bible never commends homosexuality
* Most relate to male-male sexual acts but Romans 1 includes female-female
* The texts are in both the Old Testament and the New Testament
* The texts come in different forms - narrative (Gen 19), Israelite law (Lev), Apostolic theological (Rom) & moral (1 Cor, 1 Tim) teaching to churches

The Church and the Bible
* This understanding has been the view held by the church across time and space
* It remains the stated teaching of the Anglican Communion (Lambeth Resolution I.10 in 1998) and the Church of England (1987 General Synod motion, Issues in Human Sexuality) and almost all Christian denominations.
* It is not a strange, novel fundamentalist reading of the Bible

Challenge 1
* The texts are only negative about SOME not ALL homosexual practices
* For example, gang rape (Sodom), cultic prostitution (Lev & Paul), abusive relationships (Paul), heterosexuals engaging in homosexual acts (Rom).
* The Bible is silent when we turn to it to ask about whether or not faithful, loving same-sex relationships are acceptable.

Response 1
* Some texts are more narrow (eg Sodom) but others require special pleading
* Following this approach only leaves the Bible silent on homosexuality.
*What Christians should say therefore still needs to be worked out and the bigger picture of biblical teaching, the wisdom of tradition, and the tentativeness of modern knowledge and experience warn against changing teaching.
* The consistently negative and wide-ranging texts on same-sex conduct and the teaching on marriage point towards saying all forms of homosexual practice are wrong.
* Hard to believe Paul would have said anything else, especially as loving relationships not unknown in ancient world but he does not commend them but is only negative.

Challenge 2
* Although all the texts are negative, when we ask why we find that the reasons are ones we don't accept
* For example, it is the need for sex to be procreative, the need for (superior) males to be active and women to be passive in sexual acts.

Response 2
* Do we really know the rationale?
* Many different attempts to explain it suggest that we not clear what the reason really is or that it is one we must reject.
* Is the creation narrative - being male and female - not the most likely reason, especially given Romans 1?

Challenge 3
* We know better than the biblical writers
* Our knowledge and understanding of human sexuality is so much better
* For example, we know about homosexual orientation, they assumed everyone was heterosexual.

Response 3
* Do we really know better ?
* This seems to represent lack of humility before Scripture as God's Word
* We have much to learn about human sexuality from other disciplines and their findings are still so disputed.

Challenge 4
* Other biblical texts (eg David and Jonathan, Jesus' welcome of outcasts) should be given weight and not just the ‘classic texts' on homosexuality
* We must consider broader biblical principles such as love of neighbour, liberation of oppressed, covenant faithfulness in relationships

Response 4
* It is important that the debate does not just focus on negative texts about homosexual practice
* Other texts must shape our thinking and response, especially the need to love and welcome homosexual people.
* There are dangers in rejecting specific biblical teaching because of a general principle
* Scripture nowhere commends sexual relationships simply because they are faithful covenants - it is because they are marriage

Challenge 5
* We have changed our reading of the Bible or rejected the Bible's teaching in many other areas - taking interest, slavery, contraception, divorce and remarriage, women in leadership
* The Spirit is leading us to do so now in this area of sexuality.
* Just as the Jews accepted Gentiles in Acts 15 so the church must accept gay people today despite what Scripture says

Response 5
* The church in these areas has not rejected Scripture but learned to understand Scripture better
* Doing this in some areas does not mean it is wrong in this area
* A specific case must be made in relation to homosexuality and most of the church clearly does not see its reading of the Bible as wrong
* Here - unlike the other examples - there is a consistent negative witness in the Bible
* Acts 15 particularly weak as basis for change here as that change was based on Scripture and the limits placed on Gentiles included no sexual immorality
* The danger here is perhaps being led not by the Holy Spirit but by the spirit of our age.

Beyond citing proof-texts to living the Biblical drama

The Constructive Task: Performance Model of Scripture
* Must not just appeal to a few texts to defend an ethical position
* Need to understand the biblical drama as a whole
*‘Acts' of biblical drama: creation, fall, Israel, Christ, church, new creation
* Call to faithfulness faced with new challenges that require improvisation

Act One: Creation
*Significant not just because start of Scripture but
* Appeal of Jesus to this e.g. Matt 19.4-6
* Key themes:
* The goodness of bodyliness
*The goodness and significance of the distinction in humanity between male and female, and
*The goodness of marriage as God's creation gift
*Reaffirmed in redemption e.g. 1 Cor 6, 11; Eph 5

Act Two: Fall
* Key text is Romans 1 account
* Cannot draw conclusion of ‘natural' from personal experience
* ‘The core, universal, and seemingly impenetrable claim...is this: If I came into the world this way, then how can it be wrong?... That claim is in opposition to the classic Christian doctrine, Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant, of the human being as being intrinsically and inherently fallen in all cases' (Paul Zahl)

St Andrew's Day Statement
Those who understand themselves as homosexuals, no more and no less than those who do not, are liable to false understandings based on personal or family histories, emotional dispositions, social settings, and solidarities formed by common experiences or ambitions...The struggle against disordered desires, or the misdirection of innocent desires, is part of every Christian's life, consciously undertaken in baptism. (1995)

Act Three: Israel
* Divine election - People of God as distinct from world. This to shape church's response.
* Gen 19 - Response to "the other" and problem of hetero-phobia
* Lev 18 & 20 - Divine command: call for obedience to will and word of God

Act Four: Christ
* Significance of silence?
* "Nothing in the Gospels suggests any departure from Judaic wisdom on sex and marriage, a pretty robust sense of which we gain from the Old Testament. Jesus was never reluctant to challenge received wisdoms that He wanted to change. He gives no impression that He came into the world to revolutionise sexual mores"
* Christ as fully human one
* Fully human as unmarried - not bound exclusively to any other human person
* Pattern of close, loving relationships with both men and women
* Challenge to much of our thinking - including Christian - about marriage and singleness.
* Significance of inclusion
*Inclusion and welcome not mean no boundaries or limits
* Inclusivity cannot decide between different moral visions
* Inclusion must be combined with transformation e.g. Zacchaeus

Act Five: The Church - Acts 15
* Willing to rethink and change past practice (semper reformanda)
* Acts 15 as example
* Principle - Inclusion of outsiders BUT not without expectations/conditions
These arise from Lev 17-18 and include prohibition on porneia
* Practice - Importance of experience but needs to be interpreted in light of Scripture
* "There is, of course, no one single experience. Even within the compass of a single person's life, the experience of emotion and of sexuality is very varied; and when the experiences of different people are put in play, they often challenge and contest one another. The only possible outcome, then, of a discourse founded wholly on experience is unresolved conflict" (Oliver O'Donovan).
* Personnel - Apostolic council and so need for church as whole to reach new mind
* Apostolic mind clear in NT affirmations both positively on marriage and celibacy and negatively on homosexual conduct
(1 Tim 1, Rom 1 and 1 Cor 6)

Act Six - New Creation
* All things and all people will be made new
* Neither giving nor receiving in marriage - marriage is for this age not for age to come
* Vision of the Kingdom of God where God is all in all relativises - and challenges - all our experiences of sexuality and intimate relationships.

The Biblical Drama - Conclusion
* Strong support for ‘traditional' viewpoint and critiques of some ‘revisionist' claims
* Goes beyond ‘proof-texts' to biblical theology and world-view
* Aware of issues of interpretation and hermeneutics
* Open to refinement and revision

Challenging the critics who believe God did not really say what the Church believes he said

The Critical Task: Engaging in Dialogue
* Elements of this either implicit or explicit in some of the constructive account
* Discern wider and deeper theological, moral and pastoral implications of alternative approach to the issue
* Suggest two frameworks/paradigms
* Highlight and explain 9 different questions

Two Paradigms
‘Traditionalist'
* Sexual beings: Male and Female is key
* Sexual relationships: Created institution of marriage is key
* Sexual activity: Procreation an important good
* Sexual ethic: Marriage or abstinent singleness/celibacy

‘Revisionist'
*Sexual beings: Personal sexuality is key
*Sexual relationships: Qualities of personal relationship is key
*Sexual activity: Privileges intimacy, bonding and pleasure
*Sexual ethic: Commend other form(s) of sexual relationship than marriage

Challenge 1: How to explain biblical teaching?
* Robert Gagnon - "The Bible and Homosexual Practice"
* "At the moment, the traditional understanding of these passages remains the most convincing one in the minds of most biblical scholars" (CofE House of Bishops)

Challenge 2: Is Scripture or experience ultimate authority?
‘There is a common view among us that we and the Church need to trust and work from our current human experience in the sexual field, in the light of our understanding of the Christian tradition...This inclusive approach to current manifestations of new patterns of intimacy and visible sexual lifestyles in the West implies a belief in the continuing revelation of sexual truth by the Holy Spirit' (Changing Attitude)

Challenge 3: How much do we know about orientation?
"Much of the argument of this book suggests that we are not better off in terms of justifying our metaphysical and scientific views about sexual orientation and sexual desires than the Zomnians are in justifying their views about sleep positions and the dispositions that underlie them. Our confidence that we have advanced a great deal in our understanding of sexual orientation compared to Aristophanes and his fellow celebrants in The Symposium is premature..." (Edward Stein)

Challenge 4: What is alternative to marriage and singleness?
* Blessing whatever Christians do?
* Agreed structure and moral framework?
* Friendship? (Vasey, Stuart)
* Covenant? (Jeffrey John)
* Marriage? (Eugene Rogers)

Challenge 5: What follows if accept same-sex marriage?
* Biblical witness is to male and female
* Removes union of those created as other
* Makes procreation an incidental rather than essential feature of marriage
* Bodily sexual differentiation of humankind is considered to be a matter that has no moral significance.
* Effect on marital and nuptial imagery in Scripture and the significance of this in revealing the character of God and His purpose in relation to humanity.

Challenge 6: What is understanding of sex and sexual ethic?
‘All friendships probably use erotic energy. Whether or not they include sexual expression is a matter for the discretion of those concerned, based on the complex of considerations we outline below - particularly balancing the destructiveness of sexual jealousy against the enriching potential of variety' (Changing Attitude)

Challenge 7: What is being said about desire and sin?
* Are strong existing desires a sign of goodness? What about sin and the Fall? (Zahl)
* What effect for those who continue to see same-sex desire as sign of human fallenness and a temptation to resist if church sanctifies/blesses same-sex relationships?

Challenge 8: What other exceptions/revisions to norms?
* "People who in so far as they know themselves, their loves, their sexual desires and their intimate relationships, believe that they are not fitted for marriage to someone of the opposite sex"
* What about permanence (those insecure and unable to commit) and exclusivity (those with strong sexual appetites)?
* Varieties of patterns of desire and life that make marriage or singleness difficult to fulfil.

Challenge 9: How different are we if we experience homosexual attraction?
* Should the church recognise some humans are, in a deep ontological sense, homosexual?
* Are some people, by God's intention, inherently fitted not for marriage but for another form of intimate exclusive relationship?
* Can we offer marriage in the same way to anyone and everyone as a good gift of God?
* Are we not really married if it transpires we are really homosexual?

Summary
* Real power - personally, pastorally, socially, politically - of challenges that church must change
* BUT what about theologically and biblically?
* Traditional stance has strong roots in Scripture which alternative lacks
* Alteration of stance raises major theological and ethical questions which rarely addressed by ‘revisionists'

YES, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN:
* We have nothing more to learn
* We have got it all right at present
* All loving relationships between people of same sex are wrong - friendship is vital
* Nothing good in homosexual relationships and no virtue in homosexual people
* This is most important (sexual) sin

Michael Vasey
"There is significant agreement that gay people need to begin any thinking about their way of life by gaining a sense of their inherent value as human beings and by entering into relationships based on unconditional acceptance...Although the way in which this is articulated varies considerably, the agreement on what a Christian would call the principle of grace is as impressive as it is generally unrecognised"

A Community of Grace?
* Forgiving Grace - ‘Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us'
* Welcoming Grace - ‘Welcome one another, therefore, just as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God' (Rom 15.7)
* Transforming Grace - ‘And all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit' (2 Cor 3.18)
* Costly Grace - ‘If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me' (Mk 8.34)