‘False polarisation’ over homosexuality challenged
-15/12/05
A public challenge has b
‘False polarisation’ over homosexuality challenged
-15/12/05
A public challenge has been made to the ‘false’ polarisation often made in the debate over homosexuality in both the Church of England and the wider church in the UK.
The challenge came during a BBC London News special last night, which looked at the health of the church in the nation’s capital, including the splits over issues of sexuality.
During the half-hour prime time programme Ekklesia’s director Jonathan Bartley questioned the commonly-held assumption that debates over homosexuality in the church are between one side which is ‘faithful’ to the Bible, and a another side which wants to abandon the scriptures and ‘compromise’ to the surrounding culture.
Speaking during the television programme Ekklesia’s Jonathan Bartley pointed out that both sides believe they are being faithful to the Bible, and no one side can legitimately claim to have a monopoly on its interpretation.
The real difference, Bartley suggested was between one side that wanted their views on homosexuality to be taken on by the whole church, and another side that was prepared to live with disagreements and diversity.
Bartley pointed out that the church had, during its history, worked out its divisions, changed its position, and accepted differences over the place of women, slavery, the Sabbath and even matters of peace and war. He suggested that if the church could live with diversity over matters of life and death, then surely it could accept diversity over the issue of homosexuality.
Last night’s discussion also featured Joel Edwards from the Evangelical Alliance and Hanne Stinson from the British Humanist Association. There was also an interview with the Bishop of London, Rt Rev Richard Chartres.
Jonathan Bartley comes from an Evangelical background and was previously a member of the Church of England Evangelical Council, and has written for the Guardian newspaper about his experiences.
He now rejects such labels as “Evangelical” and “Liberal”, finding them unhelpful.
Speaking after the programme, Ekklesia’s co-director Simon Barrow who has spent many years working ecumenically and also rejects such labels said; “As on slavery, women, peace and war and much else, the issue is not about knock-down arguments buttressing unassailed rightness. It is about how Christians interpret their texts and traditions (and each other), how they are persuaded ñ and how they often discover that what they thought was ëplainí is actually more demanding than the first or surface reading suggests. That is, it concerns not only our theories about ‘received wisdom’, but how we live and with what kind of responsiveness to the transcendent down-to-earthness of God.
“Faithful reading and re-reading in context, through evolving communal understanding, critical reflection, and seeking the way of Jesus in the light of the Spirit isnít, therefore, some ‘modern fad’ or ‘easy option’. Itís actually the procedure of traditional Christianity, before that term was hijacked by what some have called ‘certainty wallahs’, and by a fundamentalist refusal of the openness of the text ñ a stance which actually owes more to dogmatic nineteenth century rationalism than to the God of the Bible who is revealed in the vulnerability of flesh, narrative and sacrificial love.”
‘False polarisation’ over homosexuality challenged
-15/12/05
A public challenge has been made to the ‘false’ polarisation often made in the debate over homosexuality in both the Church of England and the wider church in the UK.
The challenge came during a BBC London News special last night, which looked at the health of the church in the nation’s capital, including the splits over issues of sexuality.
During the half-hour prime time programme Ekklesia’s director Jonathan Bartley questioned the commonly-held assumption that debates over homosexuality in the church are between one side which is ‘faithful’ to the Bible, and a another side which wants to abandon the scriptures and ‘compromise’ to the surrounding culture.
Speaking during the television programme Ekklesia’s Jonathan Bartley pointed out that both sides believe they are being faithful to the Bible, and no one side can legitimately claim to have a monopoly on its interpretation.
The real difference, Bartley suggested was between one side that wanted their views on homosexuality to be taken on by the whole church, and another side that was prepared to live with disagreements and diversity.
Bartley pointed out that the church had, during its history, worked out its divisions, changed its position, and accepted differences over the place of women, slavery, the Sabbath and even matters of peace and war. He suggested that if the church could live with diversity over matters of life and death, then surely it could accept diversity over the issue of homosexuality.
Last night’s discussion also featured Joel Edwards from the Evangelical Alliance and Hanne Stinson from the British Humanist Association. There was also an interview with the Bishop of London, Rt Rev Richard Chartres.
Jonathan Bartley comes from an Evangelical background and was previously a member of the Church of England Evangelical Council, and has written for the Guardian newspaper about his experiences.
He now rejects such labels as “Evangelical” and “Liberal”, finding them unhelpful.
Speaking after the programme, Ekklesia’s co-director Simon Barrow who has spent many years working ecumenically and also rejects such labels said; “As on slavery, women, peace and war and much else, the issue is not about knock-down arguments buttressing unassailed rightness. It is about how Christians interpret their texts and traditions (and each other), how they are persuaded – and how they often discover that what they thought was ëplain’ is actually more demanding than the first or surface reading suggests. That is, it concerns not only our theories about ‘received wisdom’, but how we live and with what kind of responsiveness to the transcendent down-to-earthness of God.
“Faithful reading and re-reading in context, through evolving communal understanding, critical reflection, and seeking the way of Jesus in the light of the Spirit isn’t, therefore, some ‘modern fad’ or ‘easy option’. It’s actually the procedure of traditional Christianity, before that term was hijacked by what some have called ‘certainty wallahs’, and by a fundamentalist refusal of the openness of the text – a stance which actually owes more to dogmatic nineteenth century rationalism than to the God of the Bible who is revealed in the vulnerability of flesh, narrative and sacrificial love.”