A big thanks to David Harris for his sensitive and insightful editorial on the sexuality debate. It pointed to a false dichotomy that unfortunately seemed to creep into most of the arguments presented by the featured panellists [at the Speaking Truth in Love event]: On one side, so the story goes, are those who take the Bible seriously and interpret it according to its plain sense; on the other side are those who use modern interpretive methods to contextualize and reframe Bible passages. So conceived, the debate breaks down into the old, well-worn stereotypes of “evangelicals” and “liberals.” But in today’s world, such dichotomies and labels are increasingly inaccurate and unhelpful. They do a real disservice both to the complexity of this issue and the complexity of the people involved.
For example, an increasing number of “evangelicals” are affirming of same-sex relationships, simply because they are discovering sound biblical arguments that support this view. These affirming biblical arguments unfortunately seemed largely absent from last month’s panel discussion (which, I hasten to add, was in other ways quite excellent!) One panellist even suggested that these affirming biblical arguments do not exist.
I think members of the PCC should know that it is possible to take the Bible seriously, according to its plain sense, and still affirm same-sex relationships. Those interested in exploring this perspective (including our panellists) might start with Matthew Vine’s very accessible God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same Sex Relationships (2014). A more scholarly treatment can be found in Jim Brownson’s Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships (2013).
Again, let me say that I appreciated the work of all the panellists, but I did notice the absence of this important perspective.
Rev. Glenn McCullough, Toronto
