What is amazing about ‘Amazing Love’?
Astonishing Beloved: Theology for Understanding Discipleship, Sexuality and Mission. Ed. by Andrew Davison. Darton, Longman & Todd: London, 2016. 144pp. £8.99
I know Andrew Davison, and had enjoyed theological conversation with him in the past. I was planning to post a review of his short book (which was sent to all members of General Synod prior to the session which included Shared Conversations) adjacent week. But I was sent this review by Peter Sanlon, which I remember is fair and interesting, and mail it here with permission.
This aim of this book can be given in the authors' own words: 'This short volume explains why nosotros think information technology'southward practiced for Christians to embrace their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, and to celebrate their relationships … We think that the Church should be willing—delighted fifty-fifty—to hallow and strengthen such commitments.' (75) The authors believe such a form is virtuous: 'We are convinced that gay and lesbian relationships can be very skillful for people, and that they can be all about people living in the ways Christian theology has long marked out equally fantabulous (or 'virtuous').' (12) So questions are posed in a manner that presupposes the Church building must comprehend aforementioned sex relationships:
What would happen if the question posed was not, 'same-sex relationships: right or incorrect?'—which is a limiting, brittle question—but rather something like 'What is the significance and purpose of sexuality and marriage in Christianity? What does sexuality and matrimony wait like in the way of Jesus Christ?, with consideration of same-sex relationships as part of that?' (56)
The context of this book'due south origin is noted as being the Shared Conversations in the Church of England. Nonetheless it is observed that those are only 'one example of the listening procedure … we hope that it will be of use further afield too. (2)
This review will firstly summarise and annotate on the statement of the book, every bit structured by the vi chapters. It is helpful that each chapter has a thesis and the work as a whole does therefore make a coherent argument. In a follow-up to this review, I volition offer some reflections on both the rhetorical and theological significance of the volume insofar every bit it pertains to its original context—the Church of England. It volition be seen that the volume explicitly aims to achieve something far more audacious than even the celebration of same sexual activity relationships.
There are vi capacity to the volume. The chapter titles are followed past a summary of the chapter thesis, along with critique.
ane Being Followers of Jesus: A crucial aspect of beingness a disciple of Jesus involves accepting the world as it is. In the words of the authors nosotros must focus on 'attending to what things are really like'. (viii) We must do the 'hard work of paying attention to how things actually are.' (10) This attending to the style things really are is given theological justification on the basis of Augustine's vision for science (x) and it is argued for on the grounds that God's Word in the Bible cannot contradict his Discussion in cosmos: 'What God has spoken in the Bible relates to the globe that God also spoke into being. No divine word of moral instruction is at cross-purposes with God'south creative Give-and-take.' (9) Every bit Christians work to sympathize the world as it truly is, they are warned that the Church has in the past been egregiously wrong on matters such every bit Just War (4) and slavery (5). Those wrongs are presented as equivalent to thinking that same sex relationships are sinful. While others are to doubt their understandings the authors take reached a identify of bodacious certainty as regards the way Anglicans should view homosexuality.
The plain fact of the thing is that information technology is possible to take a very positive view of beloved between gay people and believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Similarly, you can be glad when a lesbian friend finds someone to commit herself to—giving her whole cocky, including her trunk—and believe exactly what the Thirty-Nine Articles say about God. (6)
2 Being Homo: This affiliate is about science and argues that the scientific 'evidence is conclusive' (thirteen) on 3 matters. Firstly there is diversity and complexity in sexual desires. Secondly, homosexual desires are non called by the individual. Thirdly, same sex activity desires are not hands changed. None of these claims are technically incorrect in and of themselves, notwithstanding their abstraction, presentation and rhetorical deployment means the claims of the chapter are in the end misleading to the uninformed reader.
The chapter has an embarrassingly simplistic view of 'science'. The following terms are used as if their significant is straightforward and obvious: biological science, psychology and scientific discipline. So we read of 'psychological facts' (twenty), 'psychiatric conditions' (17), conclusive prove (xiii) biological cause (24) and more varied matters such as population studies (25). The nature of evidence and determination in these fields is necessarily complex and certainly non the same in each one or simple. Even so the authors claim their conclusions are conclusive and based on 'clear evidence' (24). They inform us that 'scientists agree almost universally that there is a biological ground to same-sex attraction.' (29) When any of the claims made in this chapter are approached by a moderately informed reader they fall apart. So for case the informed reader will be aware that claiming biological bear witness for man sexual want is 'clear' when the ground for that is same sexual practice activeness in animals is dubious on many levels (24). The claims that it is difficult and rare for a person to alter their sexual disposition is technically true on the basis of certain studies—but that discounts the more than expensive and meaning longitudinal population studies that show considerable fluidity in sexual want.
On numerous points matters of major relevant significance are ignored. So for case the removal of homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Clan'due south 'Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders' was a pivotal step for the homosexualist motility. This is described by our authors every bit if it were only a purely rational decision taken on the footing of 'the psychological facts' (20) and in light of 'psychological reality.' (21) Failure to include information virtually what really occurred in the APA is disingenuous. In reality the arrangement was subject to exactly the same kind of manipulation, bullying and pressure that homosexual activists at present use against any institution that refuses to gloat their lifestyles. The details of this are given at length by Dr. Ronald Bayer (a pro-homosexual psychiatrist) in the book, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnoses (1981). That historical narrative is just ane of many areas that are so partially covered in this book as to present a misleading whitewash of history. Readers are non told that the studies of Alfred Kinsey of which much is made (23) were not done upon representative samples of the population, just rather on convicts and horrifically on babies and children who were sexually abused in the process. To present conclusions from Kinsey without mentioning this is grotesque. The disgraceful matters involved are widely documented, summarised in reports such as this: http://icolf.org/fact/ecosoc-the-kinsey-plant-and-kid-sexual-abuse/
The second major problem with the affiliate is the assumption throughout that the 'certain' conclusions summarised within it are actually clear. Clarity of the simplistic science presented in this chapter is central to the thesis. So for example, 'That a proportion of the population is attracted more or less exclusively to people of the aforementioned sex, and that this attraction cannot exist changed, is articulate.' (25) The import of this claim of clarity for the overall statement is seen in lite of the subsequent chapter.
3 Beingness Biblical: This affiliate ostensibly argues that the Bible does not teach clearly on the topic of homosexuality as to whether it is good or sinful. If we wish to be Biblical we must take the Bible is not articulate:
What nosotros should exist willing to contest is the sense that there is only one, settled, and unquestionable man understanding of precisely what the Bible says on a given issue, including this one. (38)
The argument given nigh space to demonstrate the Bible'due south lack of clarity on homosexuality, is that some in the by idea the Bible justified slavery, and that view turned out to be incorrect (39-42). If the Church tin can be wrong on that point, and so the Bible must exist unclear and we could be incorrect if nosotros think the Bible teaches homosexuality is sinful. Incidentally the slavery argument occurs so oftentimes throughout this book that at one point it is fifty-fifty acknowledged that 'Slavery [has been] mentioned in this book a number of times.' (71)
Further arguments for lack of clarity on this topic include the idea that many texts traditionally thought relevant are not (43). The One-time Testament Laws are dismissed since we practise non keep all the nutrient laws (45). Sodom is almost gang rape, not monogamous same-sex relationships (43). Paul's teaching is set aside due to the assumptions of his day which colour his words (51). The condemnations in Rom. 1 are contextualised inside the wider narrative of Romans to suggest that they mean the opposite of what they seem to say due to the 'overarching argument of Romans that God, in God's goodness, acted against nature, to include, unexpectedly, those who had been outside the covenant.' (52) Incidentally this is an excellent example of handling the Bible in a manner which contradicts Commodity 20 which tells us the Church building may non 'so expound ane place of scripture that it be repugnant to another.' The lack of academic credibility in the chapter is evident in the fact that not i of the arguments has not been more than adequately handled in standard academic treatments such as those by Robert Gagnon. No alternative views or counter-arguments are mentioned or noted at any point.
Then on the face up of it this affiliate states that its thesis is that (in contrast to the plain elementary science of the previous chapter), the Bible is unclear on whether homosexuality is sinful. When the actual argument is traced through it tin be seen that the thesis is something more bold. The authors do not think the Bible is unclear on homosexuality—they think it is clear that it can exist blessed by God. Those conservatives who recollect otherwise are caricatured as guilty of what C. S. Lewis chosen 'chronological snobbery.' (55) They hold a 'one-dimensional' (55) view. A theological basis for the claim that scripture means the opposite of what it appears to say is that nosotros must translate scripture in calorie-free of God'south voice elsewhere:
Much less tin can we imagine that the God who inspired these texts, and inspires the church building today, can exist contained in our express understanding of Scripture. We must exist open up to the standing movement of God, within the Church and out, to bring us into truth. (42)
So the truthful thesis of the affiliate is that God is clear in communicating to us virtually the potential goodness of homosexual relationships. It is recommended that we should end asking whether same sex allure is correct or wrong, and instead ask 'What does sexuality and union look like in the mode of Christ?, with consideration of same-sexual practice relationships as part of that?' (56) In other words the Church should stop request if homosexual relationships are incorrect and only accept that they are to exist celebrated. Bookish and spiritual appointment is shut downward under the guise of ongoing academic and spiritual engagement.
There are, then, 2 arguments within this chapter. On the one hand scripture is unclear whether homosexual relationships are sinful. On the other paw information technology is clear that they can be virtuous. This rhetorical strategy shall be commented on farther below.
four Being Part of the Story: This chapter presents a vision of how believers can embrace homosexual relationships as existence in line with a new definition of the Church'southward tradition.
We are told that 'The Christian tradition is dynamic, not static.' (57) It is argued that 'We can understand Christian tradition, in part, as the readings of Scripture that each generation makes afresh.' (58) Examples are given of areas where the church building has changed its mind. These are idea to support the dynamic view of tradition, and include contraception, clerical celibacy, slavery (over again!) and female roles. Setting aside the complexities of the examples given, information technology must exist said that the understanding of tradition given past the authors is not one that any Church Father, Medieval Schoolman, Reformer or Anglican divine would take recognised. Given the idea of tradition being something that is handed on through generations, this is problematic. From earliest days the tradition of the church building was to do with a central apostolic message comprised of loci that were recognised as the Rule of Faith. The emphasis was not on it changing as ane generation died and another arose – quite the contrary. As Irenaeus wrote,
The Church having received this preaching, this Religion, though scattered through the whole world yet carefully preserves it. She believes these points of doctrine as if she had but ane soul and i heart. She proclaims them, teaches them and hands them down with perfect harmony.
The tradition of the church building concerns a message that must be stable if it is to be tradition, and if the church which hands it on is to remain recognisably a church. When it comes to the bodily topic of homosexual exercise, even though it is not properly speaking a affair of the Rule of Faith, it is still the case that the Church has universally and consistently through time insisted that scripture teaches same sex relationships are sinful. This is demonstrated in some detail in Fortson & Grams. Unchanging Witness: The Consistent Christian Didactics on Homosexuality in Scripture and Tradition. B&H (2016).
The chapter concludes by asking how a believer can exist a part of the ongoing dynamic story that is the Christian tradition. The answer given is that we must discern the 'revolutionary message of the Bible' and distinguish that from what 'simply reflects the common assumptions of the time.' (72) This would, one might imagine, be a massively complex and convoluted task—maybe comparable to relating Q to the priority of the Gospels. Not at all. The authors are able to explicate breezily how 'we call up the principle applies to discernments near aforementioned-sex relationships.' (73) The timeless unchanging revolutionary core of scripture (i.e. what the Church building has traditionally called Tradition) is that 'we are virtually truly ourselves when we live for others.' (73) As regards the topic in paw: 'We learn that this living-for-others underlies the truest meaning of sexuality.' (73) And so information technology is argued that a aforementioned sexual activity human relationship which is engaged in for the good of the other, is in the final analysis an embodiment of scripture'southward revolutionary call to live for the other. Annihilation that the Bible appears to say which contradicts this can be dismissed every bit merely being the assumptions of people in the past, who were out of step with both the revolutionary message within the Bible and what God is currently maxim through the culture and church. The inconsistencies and difficulties with this vision of how God speaks are legion.
v Being in Love: This three page chapter argues that 'love is dearest' (76) wherever it is found and in whatsoever form it is experienced. Since it is the office of the church to welcome beloved wherever information technology is found,
This volume explains why we think it'southward good for Christians to embrace their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, and to gloat their relationships … Nosotros remember that the Church should exist willing—delighted fifty-fifty—to hallow and strengthen such commitments. (75)
The statement that honey must be historic wherever it is found is stated with a hitting boldness and naiveté.
We can rejoice in dearest betwixt two women, or 2 men, simply considering it's love. We tin can take this love—these relationships, these people—into the center of the Church because that'south what we do with love, with relationships, and with people. (77)
The difficulty with this completely unqualified vision of welcoming love is that it fails to recognise that some loves are sinful because they are dearest for sinful things. The love of somebody married to some other is but i obvious case. The possibility and location of sin is something our authors struggle to clear. While in Chapter v there is no room for sin in loving desires, in Affiliate one sin is granted a potential only undefined role. So nosotros are told, 'Sex isn't sinful in itself, nor is want sinful in itself, just we can sin in this part of life.' (6) The obvious way to bring clarity to this is to say that desires can themselves be tainted by sin – about manifestly if they are desires for something that is straightforwardly forbidden by scripture, or (more subtle) if we are seeking something that is in itself adept (e.grand. sense of belonging) likewise much or in a place God says we ought not look for it. Furthermore the Christian doctrine of sin is not restricted to consideration of that which is fully conscious, chosen or volitional.
Insofar as the specific example of beloved between two aforementioned sex attracted persons is concerned—on what basis would the authors say that such love ought non exist extended to include a third or fourth willing partner? Most fundamentally this vision of unqualified credence fails to account for the cardinal nature of Christ's welcome. The point is that all are welcome into the Church but all are commanded and empowered past the Spirit to exist changed by his ongoing welcome. Whatever the earth assumes is love and sees as an unqualified adept is not necessarily so viewed by Jesus. 1 of the most loving gifts Jesus gives us is the daily work of repentance and mortification of sin.
6 Being Missional: The final chapter argues that the Church building is viewed as a 'toxic brand' (82) due to its refusal to celebrate same sex activity relationships. Changing this is essential to reverse decline in the Church of England (79). Needless to say the fact that every denomination that has embraced same sex wedlock has seen catastrophic and in most cases near final decline is not mentioned. No explanation equally to why the outcome for the Church of England would exist dissimilar is given, since the arguments used to justify the innovation elsewhere are identical.
Information technology is claimed that a vision of mission which embraces the civilisation's credence of homosexuality will be Biblical since it follows the Pauline example.
Paul'south mission did non impose alien values from afar. He became all things to all people … This is how Christianity spread in all cultures, taking everyone seriously as the people they were. (83)
It is difficult to come across how this is a faithful summary of the message which demanded that all hearers repent and which was accused by observers equally having 'turned the globe upside downwardly.'
The chapter concludes by focusing not on the mission to the watching world, but on the real mission which this book is concerned with—that of forcing the Church building of England to submit to the homosexualist agenda. More must be said almost the rhetoric and theology which underlies this mission to the Church, just for now we can note that Chapter half-dozen quotes a letter written to a Bishop by a lay person. The letter complains about a vicar who has sought to uphold the traditional view of homosexuality. What is astonishing about the letter is that information technology is reproduced in an academic book without any qualification or clarification, and within it associates a conservative Anglican group with the want to execute homosexuals. I shall quote the relevant paragraph in full (The three usages of '…' are original to the volume):
'I am 48, happily married, one son, but do have gay friends and family and I don't view them as sinners who demand to be put to expiry … Our vicar … posted on the church website that 'we' were proud to support Anglican Mainstream … Obviously this was not the view of the PCC.' (90-91)
It is non possible to tell from the extract published whether the original letter accused Anglican Mainstream of supporting the execution of gays, but as reproduced in the book that is the implication. Furthermore, the letter of the alphabet concludes past accusing the vicar's sermon on Romans 1 of extreme prejudice and possible misdeed:
How can a unproblematic layman like me prevent this type of farthermost prejudice (and maybe criminal offence) from happening once more. Should one just walk abroad and find a Church, or vicar, who is, quite frankly, more Christian? (92)
The mode this letter is reproduced without any critique or clarifications is a long way from responsible journalism, never mind academic writing! The highly emotive and irresponsible conclusion to this book demonstrates that the authors' mission is to change the Church of England—and the methods utilised will exist not balanced reasoned academic statement, but a form of deceptive and manipulative rhetoric that ought to accept no place in the Church. I shall say more than near the rhetorical strategy and theological significance of this book as a whole in the follow up.
What in summary is the statement of this volume for the Church jubilant same sex relationships? Taken at face value it is equally follows:
Disciples of Jesus must learn what the globe is actually similar. Nosotros exercise and so from a simplistic extravaganza of scientific discipline. That which in the Bible appears to condemn homosexuality is unclear or not really nearly homosexuality or reflects prejudices of people in a primitive culture. There is a articulate revolutionary bulletin of welcome to the outsider in the Bible which means the Church should celebrate aforementioned sex activity relationships. The tradition the Church has which offers an ethical vision that does not have homosexuality is non actually the Church's tradition. The tradition is whatsoever each generation finds when information technology brings its experiences into conversation with scripture. God continues to speak through the culture and Church every bit information technology engages in this procedure. Beloved is love and is skillful without whatsoever qualification. We believe that same sex love is therefore something the Church building is obliged to celebrate as the Church should gloat love. Celebrating aforementioned sex relationships is essential if the Church is to engage in a mission that faithfully reflects that seen in the Bible, and that is effective in today'due south civilization.
In a follow-upward, I will explore the significance of this approach for the Church's chat almost sexuality and sexual ideals.
Rev'd Dr Peter Sanlon is Vicar of St. Mark's Church, Tunbridge Wells. He read theology at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. He has published books such as Simply God (IVP) and Augustine's Theology of Preaching (Fortress). He enjoys the creative chaos of normal parish life.
Follow me on Twitter @psephizo
Much of my work is done on a freelance ground. If yous have valued this postal service, would y'all consider altruistic £1.20 a calendar month to back up the production of this weblog?
If you enjoyed this, practise share it on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo. Like my page on Facebook.
Much of my work is washed on a freelance basis. If yous accept valued this mail service, you can make a unmarried or repeat donation through PayPal:
Comments policy: Good comments that engage with the content of the post, and share in respectful debate, tin add together existent value. Seek first to understand, then to be understood. Make the nearly charitable construal of the views of others and seek to acquire from their perspectives. Don't view debate as a conflict to win; address the argument rather than tackling the person.
Source: https://www.psephizo.com/sexuality-2/what-is-amazing-about-amazing-love/
0 Response to "What is amazing about ‘Amazing Love’?"
Post a Comment