“Scriptural texts about homosexual practice are uniformly negative.”
The Bible is
clearly opposed to the “Selfie”. Many may think that such a ‘self-focussed
image’ is implicitly bound up with many texts which call us to think of others,
rather than ourselves. Together with many texts which see worship of any type
of image as idolatrous, the case could easily be made that the Bible condemns
the “selfie”.
But it
should be obvious to anyone that the camera, much less the smartphone with
integral camera simply did not exist in biblical times, so “the selfie” could
hardly have been condemned by the Bible.
Recent years
have had a proliferation of new words: from ‘phubbing’ to the ‘twerk’,
lexophiles everywhere have enjoyed this latest crop of neologisms.
The
neologisms of 1886 were rather more serious than the current crop. These
included “homosexuality”, “heterosexuality”, and “bisexuality”; these featured in
the first serious academic study of sexual psychopathy and were coined by
Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing (Psychopathia
Sexualis: eine Klinisch-Forensische Studie - Sexual Psychopathy: A
Clinical-Forensic Study). His choice of hybrid words (a mixture of Greek
and Latin) and his decision to write much of his book in Latin was a deliberate
choice to deter the amateur from seeking to understand this difficult area of
study.
So the word in current use throughout the
discussion on human sexuality in the Church is just over 125 years old, and yet
it is being used as if it was used by God himself in writing the Bible, to
condemn a group of people called “homosexuals” for their sinfulness.
Fast forward to 1994, and in the wake of the
development of HIV/AIDS, a new term is coined by medical epidemiologists: “MSM”.
This is an abbreviation for “Men who have Sex with Men” and specifically refers
to people who would not, under any circumstance, refer to themselves as “gay”, “homosexual”,
or “bisexual”. The need for this new phrase arose as researchers sought to
identify the spread of the virus and disease risk in sexual activity. “MSMs”
exist in many continents and cultures, and they would identify as ‘heterosexual’
or ‘straight’, but in the absence of women, they are content to have sex with
men instead. In some cultural situations, where contact with women is strictly
controlled, sex between two men can occur as a matter of mutual convenience,
rather than as an act of love. Thus, sexual activity can occur in all-male
environments and cultures from the prison to the ocean-going vessel, from the single-sex
school to armed forces on active service. It can be consensual, and for mutual
gratification, or it can be a weapon of aggression, in which the ‘conquered’ are
dominated by the victorious, and raped or abused as part of their humiliation.
To try to sum up all of the above in a
single word or term would be a fruitless endeavour. There can be no similarity
between a loving, committed relationship and an act of war. And yet this is
what many recent commentators, including contributors to the Pilling Report,
have done. They have ignored the huge amount of research into the subject over
many decades, and gone for the “one-size-fits-all” definition, using ‘homosexuality’
to cover all of the above. Some more recent commentators have even gone so far
as to repeat the most hateful of all attacks, suggesting a link between
homosexuality and paedophilia: an accusation as offensive as it is absurd and untrue.
Yes, the Bible is consistent in the
oft-quoted passages from Leviticus and Paul. Leviticus uses the line “if a man
lies with a man as with a woman” in a long category of banned sexual
relationships, even involving quadrupeds (which shall also be put to death for
their deeds). It is, of course, the act which is condemned, as there is never
any discussion of a relationship – or even love – between two men or two women being
forbidden. The love of David for Jonathan, or Ruth for Naomi are consistently
held up as models of faithfulness, as is the relationship between Jesus and John,
the beloved disciple, though swift condemnation will always fall on any who may
dare to suggest that there was ever any impropriety in any of these
relationships.
Paul’s words have caused more problems,
often as a result of bad translations. It is, of course, unacceptable to use
the word “homosexuals” as a translation of his writings, though some poor
quality translations erroneously do just that. One word (malakoi –‘soft’) is
thought to refer to those who live in opulent silks and a decadent lifestyle.
Another word (arsenokoitai) is much harder to translate (there are few other
times the word occurs in contemporary writings, so it is harder to corroborate
its meaning), but probably refers to prostitution or ‘pimping’. Neither word
relates to anything a 21st Century person would understand by
homosexuality.
Sexuality has always - and will always - arouse
strong emotions, from tenderness and affection, to violence and oppression. It
is used as an expression of both love and hate. It cannot be uniformly
addressed and categorized. Not all heterosexual sexual activity is good, and
not all homosexual sexual activity is bad.
In terms of what the Bible says concerning
what we now know of as the human phenomenon of same-sex attraction, or
homosexuality, it is impossible to have any clarity. Jesus is, of course,
silent on the matter. The relationships between people of the same sex are
always treated chastely and with respect, though they are more often are categorised
as ‘friendships’ without too many questions being put about the exact nature of
their relationship.
The ‘acts’ it does mention may well be more
akin to what I have referred to above as “MSM”, in which (usually) men find
sexual release with other men in the absence of women, often with violence or
as an act of dominating a conquered army or prisoner.
The contemporary context of same-sex
relationships, now recognized by civil law as equal in rights to opposite-sex
relationships is a world away from the culture, context, and arguments of the
biblical era.
Abusive, unequal, or violent sexual
assaults are rightly punishable by law, whether they are homosexual or
heterosexual in nature.
The loving relationship between two people
of the same sex is what has caused most of the consternation among those seeking
a way forward in the current debate. But despite all of the negative publicity,
people of the same sex still do manage to meet and, indeed, fall in love. They
still wish to make commitments to each other, and they want prayers said for
them, and indeed, they continue to seek God’s blessing on their relationship.
It is little short of miraculous that there
still are gay men and lesbians who believe in God, and want God to be a part of
their lives. Their faith is a vital part of their life, their work, and their relationships.
This is despite all that the Church has done over many centuries to alienate,
and even persecute people who have experienced same sex attraction.
If we believe in the Holy Spirit, we must believe
that the Spirit is capable of saying a new thing to the Church today. Jesus
ended his earthly ministry by saying to his disciples “I have many more things to
say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into
all the truth.” At that time, it was “unbearable” to consider that two men or two
women might publicly declare their love for each other.
Can we
dare to believe that we are witnessing the Holy Spirit leading his people today,
affirming the love which two people of the same sex find
in each other, and honouring the commitment they wish to make by blessing in
God’s name that promise of love, loyalty, and fidelity as a witness and sign of
God’s love in the world today?
No comments:
Post a Comment