A better understanding, not a new one

By Paul Schratz

High-ranking Catholics involved in ecumenical dialogue are watching what's happening to the Anglican Church the way they might watch someone trying to stick a screwdriver into an electrical outlet.
Despite numerous warnings, many of them coming from within their own ranks, some Anglican leaders insist on trying to come up with new ways to break old laws.

The long-term fear is that as long as the Catholic Church is teaching God's design for man, while divisions in the Anglican communion are promoting sexual libertarianism, fruitful discussions on Church unity can hardly take place.

When it comes to the Anglican Church in Vancouver, one hardly knows where to begin. One hopes cooler heads will ultimately prevail, and yet we've come to the point where New Westminster Bishop Michael Ingham, who has already authorized the blessing of same-sex relationships, is now calling for Christianity to develop "a better theology of sexuality."

A "better" theology is one that would incorporate "a better understanding of the complex role sexuality plays in our human nature and of the purposes of God in creating us as sexual beings."

Homosexuality, he told a conference in Ottawa, is a "basic and natural orientation experienced by some members of the human community, just as we find the same thing among some animal species, and in Christian terms we must come to think of this as not only natural but also God-given and good."

"Faithfulness and commitment" are the "supreme message of the life of Jesus and ought to be the principal standard for Christian sexual ethics, not sexual orientation, not propagation, nor even marriage," Bishop Ingham said.

It's not hard to foresee that the "better understanding" of sexuality he calls for would result in more acceptance for not just homosexual behaviour, but all sexual behaviour outside marriage, including, he admits, birth control, masturbation, and abortion, all areas that Scripture and Christian tradition make clear are not in keeping with God's design.

In promoting a new theology of sexuality, Bishop Ingham doesn't seem to be aware that such a new theology has already been developing. In documents like Humanae Vitae, and in Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body, a richer understanding of human sexuality conforms with and informs, but doesn't deform, our previous knowledge of sexuality.

Rev. Royal Hamel, executive director of Light the Darkness Ministries in Ontario, wrote in a newspaper article that Bishop Ingham is being praised as precedent-setting in the Canadian Anglican Church, but that his words put him in direct conflict with Evangelicals, some mainline Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox.

One of the bishop's central errors, said Rev. Hamel, is to adopt the popular belief that since Jesus didn't specifically condemn homosexuality, its practice is permissible, if not encouraged.

For instance, Bishop Ingham has said, "As a Christian, I must turn to the New Testament, not to St. Paul, who for some reason has been regarded as the Bible's authority on sex, but to Jesus. I believe it is in Jesus that we see what God intends for humanity, for male and female alike, and in Jesus we see a glimpse of the `fullness of life' that God establishes through Him as the new humanity."

In doing so, Bishop Ingham "deliberately puts a wedge between the teaching of St. Paul and Jesus," said Rev. Hamel, since St. Paul did have something to say about homosexuality.

Rev. Hamel pointed out that historic Christianity "has always taught that it was God Himself Who inspired the prophets to write Scripture. Ultimately it was Father, Son, and Spirit Who acted in concert regarding every word of Scripture, whether written by Paul, Luke, Matthew, or any other writer."

Was the Spirit of God Who inspired Paul's writings on sexuality somehow in conflict with the Father and the Son? "This would be utter nonsense," said Rev. Hamel. "At bottom the triune God guided Paul, and therefore we can say that Paul's words on sexuality are Jesus's words as well."

In short, contrary to what many in Anglicanism are saying, God's will for sexual design is very clear. The only new theology that is needed is to understand it better, not to rewrite it.