I really didn’t want to write this blog on the theme of ‘Gay
Marriage’ because I suspect we in the church can’t win either way. Yet to ignore the issue in the week that
parliament passed a Bill in favour of same sex marriage, would surely be to
ignore ‘the elephant in the room’ - and if my attempt to write a blog is about
anything it’s to do with trying to make that ongoing, and at times difficult,
connection between contemporary living and faith.
So here goes. I’m on a ‘journey’ with this one and to be honest I have not yet arrived at a ‘settled’ position. I can see both sides and have good friends whose views I greatly respect yet who advocate very different positions.
So these are some of my two-sided observations. I write them not as a theological or ethics essay but the musings of a ‘jobbing pastor’.
To begin with we might want to underline that marriage has been, until now, by definition a partnership between a man and woman. Isn’t that the most simple and straightforward reading of scripture and surely that’s been a widely held and traditional understanding in the majority of cultures? Yet...others might argue that the ‘essence’ of marriage can readily be transferred to a loving and committed relationship of a same sex union. Some might also say that the Bible was written at a very different time when the ‘world-view’ on sexuality was, in today’s terms, restrictive.
Let’s take the bible bit a little further – as someone who owes his early faith development almost exclusively to the evangelical wing of the church I readily understand it when people place a high view on scripture as they make ethical decisions – I think I still do that myself. Yet...we are all familiar with the way we ‘refine’ some of the biblical injunctions we hear (especially from Paul!) – so we don’t, for example, expect slaves to always obey their masters, lots of women I know in church have their hair braided and wear pearls (even though it’s explicitly forbidden in scripture) and most people in my circle accepted the ministry of women years ago. In other words on a number of issues we have got used to reading the bible in the context of its day making certain cultural allowances that are not seen as necessary to our own age. To read the bible like that (rather than just quote/shout texts at each other) takes a lot of hard work – we have to discover what are ‘first order’ principles which stand the test of time and are appropriate to all cultures and ages and what are the ‘second order’ ones that are culture specific. And can evangelicals change their mind on the issue of gay marriage? Well yes – the most obvious example is Steve Chalk speaking in favour of it just last month.
Another tack – don’t we sing in church about ‘all are welcome’ and didn’t I preach last Sunday about the ‘inclusivity’ of the gospel (yes I did!) Yet...’mea culpa’ on this one because sometimes as a church community we can often use these phrases, in my view, a little too glibly. That’s because a church does have certain – usually commonly held – boundaries, especially in terms of ethical behaviour.
Let’s think about what’s gone in parliament this week. You could argue that the government has been courageous on gay marriage and certainly many people (especially in my children’s generation) genuinely wonder what all the fuss is about. Some might say – and I can understand this – that the Bill is a natural progression from the Civil Partnership one a few years ago – and that, of course, it will not bring down traditional marriage as we know it. Yet...other commentators have questioned whether any government has the right to redefine a commonly accepted and understood word like ‘marriage’ – and some of us would fully endorse the natural justice of Civil Partnerships whilst being reluctant to go the next step and re-define marriage.
However, shouldn’t the government also be praised for the provisions it has made for the churches with the commitment that no church will be prosecuted under equal opportunities legislation because it refuses to bless/officiate same sex weddings? Yet...it’s only the Anglican Church which is actually prohibited from hosting same sex weddings. The rest of us can use our discretion – for example - the URC Church will allow same sex marriage if the local congregation is in favour. Baptist Union ministers (me!) are currently not allowed to officiate at such weddings – but already there are calls for this to be changed and become the decision, as with the URC’s , of the local congregation.
So here goes. I’m on a ‘journey’ with this one and to be honest I have not yet arrived at a ‘settled’ position. I can see both sides and have good friends whose views I greatly respect yet who advocate very different positions.
So these are some of my two-sided observations. I write them not as a theological or ethics essay but the musings of a ‘jobbing pastor’.
To begin with we might want to underline that marriage has been, until now, by definition a partnership between a man and woman. Isn’t that the most simple and straightforward reading of scripture and surely that’s been a widely held and traditional understanding in the majority of cultures? Yet...others might argue that the ‘essence’ of marriage can readily be transferred to a loving and committed relationship of a same sex union. Some might also say that the Bible was written at a very different time when the ‘world-view’ on sexuality was, in today’s terms, restrictive.
Let’s take the bible bit a little further – as someone who owes his early faith development almost exclusively to the evangelical wing of the church I readily understand it when people place a high view on scripture as they make ethical decisions – I think I still do that myself. Yet...we are all familiar with the way we ‘refine’ some of the biblical injunctions we hear (especially from Paul!) – so we don’t, for example, expect slaves to always obey their masters, lots of women I know in church have their hair braided and wear pearls (even though it’s explicitly forbidden in scripture) and most people in my circle accepted the ministry of women years ago. In other words on a number of issues we have got used to reading the bible in the context of its day making certain cultural allowances that are not seen as necessary to our own age. To read the bible like that (rather than just quote/shout texts at each other) takes a lot of hard work – we have to discover what are ‘first order’ principles which stand the test of time and are appropriate to all cultures and ages and what are the ‘second order’ ones that are culture specific. And can evangelicals change their mind on the issue of gay marriage? Well yes – the most obvious example is Steve Chalk speaking in favour of it just last month.
Another tack – don’t we sing in church about ‘all are welcome’ and didn’t I preach last Sunday about the ‘inclusivity’ of the gospel (yes I did!) Yet...’mea culpa’ on this one because sometimes as a church community we can often use these phrases, in my view, a little too glibly. That’s because a church does have certain – usually commonly held – boundaries, especially in terms of ethical behaviour.
Let’s think about what’s gone in parliament this week. You could argue that the government has been courageous on gay marriage and certainly many people (especially in my children’s generation) genuinely wonder what all the fuss is about. Some might say – and I can understand this – that the Bill is a natural progression from the Civil Partnership one a few years ago – and that, of course, it will not bring down traditional marriage as we know it. Yet...other commentators have questioned whether any government has the right to redefine a commonly accepted and understood word like ‘marriage’ – and some of us would fully endorse the natural justice of Civil Partnerships whilst being reluctant to go the next step and re-define marriage.
However, shouldn’t the government also be praised for the provisions it has made for the churches with the commitment that no church will be prosecuted under equal opportunities legislation because it refuses to bless/officiate same sex weddings? Yet...it’s only the Anglican Church which is actually prohibited from hosting same sex weddings. The rest of us can use our discretion – for example - the URC Church will allow same sex marriage if the local congregation is in favour. Baptist Union ministers (me!) are currently not allowed to officiate at such weddings – but already there are calls for this to be changed and become the decision, as with the URC’s , of the local congregation.
And lastly (if you’ve made it to this point) – shouldn’t you
(meaning me – a minister) be clearer than this – shouldn’t you have made up your
mind a long time ago on this issue so that you can give clear moral guidance to
your local community? Yet... – well actually just ‘No’ to that. I believe that to be made in the ‘image of
God’ is to have the gift of asking questions and living with blurred edges and
uncomfortable nuance. Generally I
suspect most churches (there are exceptions that I know of and deeply respect)
have not reached the point of accepting gay marriage – and probably that’s for
a host of different, even contradictory, reasons. But this isn’t the end point of our journey –
and perhaps there will never be one. Unfortunately
it is sadly a great probability that both local and national churches will
split on this issue.
So is there any hope or clarity out there? Yes, I think there is – because the way we debate this and continue to deal with issues of sexuality will say a lot about our core values. We need to engage with those who take a different position to us with respect – open to the possibility that God can use both ‘their’ and ‘my’ views to speak to the other. That was a process heard at its best three weeks ago when Steve Chalke and Steve Holmes debated this issue on BBC Radio Four’s Sunday programme. The courtesy they showed each other as they took this issue from opposite ends of the evangelical spectrum gave us a clue as to how this debate needs to be carried further.
Well – after all that, Sunday’s sermon on The Transfiguration seems like child’s play!
With best wishes,
So is there any hope or clarity out there? Yes, I think there is – because the way we debate this and continue to deal with issues of sexuality will say a lot about our core values. We need to engage with those who take a different position to us with respect – open to the possibility that God can use both ‘their’ and ‘my’ views to speak to the other. That was a process heard at its best three weeks ago when Steve Chalke and Steve Holmes debated this issue on BBC Radio Four’s Sunday programme. The courtesy they showed each other as they took this issue from opposite ends of the evangelical spectrum gave us a clue as to how this debate needs to be carried further.
Well – after all that, Sunday’s sermon on The Transfiguration seems like child’s play!
With best wishes,
Ian
No comments:
Post a Comment