The Great
Evangelical Sell-Out
 TONY HIGTON examines the
Church of England’s ambivalent attitude towards homosexual clergy
AT THE ABWON (Action for Biblical Witness to Our Nation) conference last
November, my initial thoughts on the homosexual issue could be summed up
as, ‘By the grace of God, let’s take a strong stand and see if he will
stem the pro-gay tide again.’
Seeking God about future
strategy, however, we were surprised to sense that God’s desire was that
we were not to take any immediate high-profile initiative which might
have the effect of encouraging practising homosexual clergy to continue to
conceal their lifestyles. ‘No,’ said the Lord, ‘It is my time to reveal
what is hidden.’ We prayed together and the revelations began.
ALREADY three
bishops had been ‘outed’ by Outrage, the militant homosexual group. The
media had also revealed that the new evangelical bishop of Durham had been
convicted as a clergyman twenty-six years earlier of an indecent act with
another man in a public toilet. The story highlighted a number of other
issues which I raised at the C of E General Synod a fortnight after the AS
WON assembly.
The next
morning,
outside the building in which Synod was meeting. Outrage publicly named
ten bishops as alleged homosexuals. The House of Bishops issued a
statement dismissing the allegations but, sadly, not specifically denying
them.
Six weeks later I sat In
the Evangelical , Anglican Leaders Conference (EALC), listening to Michael
Baughen, Bishop of Chester, expressing disapproval of homosexual practice
and announcing the establishment of a conference on the issue. By his
side, on the platform, was John Gladwin, the new Bishop of Guildford, one
of four evangelicals on the working party of seven members which in 1990
produced the unanimous, and notorious, Osborn Report on homosexuality.
Commissioned by the House
of Bishops, it was suppressed by them as being too hot to handle, but it
was leaked to the media and states that, although not ideal, a committed
homosexual lifestyle might make the best moral sense for
homosexually-orientated Christians wishing to avoid promiscuity. The
report affirms that it would be wrong for the Church of England to reach a
definitive conclusion on the matter at this particular point in time.
After all, it claimed,
many Christians accept that a quiet homosexual lifestyle is no barrier to
an effective Christian life. The document went on to question the wisdom
of church discipline over homosexual practice because it would lead to
secrecy and deceit!
The report noted, ‘Not
all gay people are celibate or living in committed relationships. Some
are exploring other lifestyles which some gay Christians find acceptable.
Some gay Christians are experimenting in sharing homes and building small
communities. These experiments in community living need to be
distinguished from uncommitted and casual lifestyles.’
It went on to say, While
the working party by no means endorses all these various lifestyles as
morally and pastorally equivalent, we do believe that the experience of
gay Christians learning to live their Christian lives in a variety of
different ways needs to be heard.’
It is interesting to note
that, had I not put my 1987 private member’s motion on the subject to
General Synod, the above report would have been the basis for discussion
among Anglicans. The Church of England hierarchy was furious that the 1987
debate torpedoed the Osborn Report. The saddest part, however, is that the
majority of the working party were evangelical.
Two months after Synod,
BBC’s Newsnight phoned me. A bishop had ‘come out’ as a homosexual,
would I do an Interview? My first inclination was to refuse, but then I
asked the identity of the man in question. I was shocked to hear that it
was Derek Rawcliffe, Assistant Bishop of Ripon. I have known Derek for
some years as an orthodox, charismatic bishop who has been regularly
involved in renewal conferences. On Newsnight he called for the
acceptance of ‘gay’ priests.
SOME YEARS AGO
Patricia and I formed a small prayer cell with Derek and his wife (who has
since died) at a renewal conference. They were a really loving, gentle
couple. A fortnight later on Radio 4’s Today programme, James Naughtie
asked Roy Williamson, the evangelical Bishop of Southwark, ‘Would you be
happy to ordain a priest who was open about his sexuality and who told you
that he was not celibate?’ Roy, who had also been on the EALC platform,
replied, ‘I would be happy to ordain a priest if his life was a life of
holiness and godliness and acceptability in terms of scripture and
tradition and the present teaching of the church.’ The interview
continued.
Naughtie:
‘And that can be
compatible with what in the jargon we call “a gay lifestyle?” I mean, in
the sense of having a homosexual relationship which is open?’
Bishop:
‘Well, it entirely
depends upon whether that relationship may be stable or not...’
In other words, a senior
evangelical bishop publicly agreed that he would, under certain
circumstances, knowingly ordain a
practising homosexual.
Some people mistakenly believe that, in a subsequent statement, Roy
Williamson went back on all this. He actually only expressed regret that
he had given the impression he would ordain practising homosexuals now,
thus breaking ranks with the House of Bishops.
AT ABOUT the
same time, a most unhelpful Pastoral Letter was released from the meeting
of senior Anglican archbishops from around the world. Concerning
homosexuals it stated, ‘Within the church itself there are those whose
pattern of sexual expression is at variance with the received Christian
moral tradition, but whose lives in other respects demonstrate the marks
of genuine Christian character.’ in other words, a person can be
persistently involved in homosexual practice and still be holy!
There are two reasons for
the rapid slide towards justifying homosexual acceptance in the Church of
England. One is a ‘re-interpretation’ of scripture. The other is human
sympathy masquerading as divine compassion.
Scripture is being
re-interpreted as having nothing to say about committed, faithful
homosexual relationships. Let me explain. The line taken is that the
Leviticus passages (18:22, 20:13) are talking only about cultic
prostitution; that Paul In the first chapter of Romans had no concept of
anyone having a ‘fixed homosexual orientation’ and therefore refers only
to bisexuals; and that in 1 Corinthians 8:9 he was concerned only with the
dominant homosexual practice in the Greek world of pederasty (an older man
having sexual relations with a boy or young man).
It is argued that the
above statements prove that the Bible has nothing to say about committed
‘gay’ relationships. Or do they? The Leviticus passages refer briefly to
child sacrifice but not to cultic prostitution. They major on incest and
adultery, which are nothing to do with such prostitution.
AS A SCHOLAR,
however, Paul would have known about ‘fixed’ homosexuals, as did Aristotle
several centuries before him. When he speaks of homosexual practice being
contrary to nature he in no way implies that for some it is not
contrary to nature (ie ‘natural’ to some). Sexual intercourse is
meant to be related to procreation, a means of human fulfilment brought
about by the union of male and female. Our bodies were neither designed
nor intended for homosexual practices, which is why such activities are so
physically risky.
In 1 Corinthians 6:9 Paul
does not use terms which refer merely to pederasty. He deliberately uses a
new word to indicate that he is referring to all homosexual
activity.
The other pressure which
causes believers to compromise comes through association with ‘gay
Christians’ who are caring, loving and apparently spiritual. I have met
many of them and so I understand this pressure. But the Bible, not human
sympathy, must be our guide.
Why has homosexuality
become the Achilles heel of the Church of England? It is a fulfilment of
the warning in Romans 1. In judgment, God is giving over an institution
which has upheld rejection of basic beliefs by some bishops and clergy
(e.g. about the virgin birth and the empty tomb), to the justification of
depravity.
In May the Archbishop of
Canterbury addressed the Anglican Evangelical Assembly on the subject of
homosexuality. He said, ‘Let me make it quite clear that Issues in
Human Sexuality recognises only two options as being in full accord
both with the Bible and the church’s tradition, namely heterosexual
marriage and celibacy...
‘The House of Bishops
will reflect thoughtfully and prayerfully on the responses to the
Statement. But we will not be stampeded into changing either its
theological position or its pastoral practice. It suits some groups to
“talk up” the story that the bishops are preparing to accept parity
between marriage and long-term, same-sex relationships or allow ordination
of practising homosexuals. That is not so. Such speculation is misleading
and causes unwarranted suspicions and anxieties.’
I am sure that many
delegates to the assembly went home encouraged, thinking that Dr Carey had
ruled out acceptance by the House of Bishops of practising homosexual
clergy, but ten years in General Synod has taught me that such statements
by bishops are very carefully worded. The archbishop has several
speech-writers, all but one of whom are liberals. One has to note what
they do not say as well as what they do. It is also important to recognise
the evangelical make-up of the audience mentioned above.
IN HIS SPEECH
Dr Carey said only that the bishops are not currently ‘preparing to accept
parity between marriage and long-term, same-sex relationships or allow
ordination of practising homosexuals.’ In other words, they are not
planning to authorise a service of blessing for homosexual couples. Nor
are they planning to enquire of ordinands’ possible homosexuality; in this
way they may avoid giving the impression that they approve of homosexual
practice when they ordain homosexuals, thus the statement gives no
reassurance whatsoever for the future.
God is merciful and longs
to restore the penitent. The problem is that I see no evidence of
penitence on the part of the House of Bishops. As a result, there have
been scandals, grave financial crises, and division. The writing is on the
wall. It is being ignored.
Tony
Higton, rector of Hawkwell Parish Church, Essex, founded ABWON which
seeks to uphold Biblical principles and morality. He achieved prominence
through his private member's motion on homosexuality in Synod in November,
1987
|
