Last Sunday Catherine Bond and Jane Pearce, a lesbian couple who are both priestesses in the Church of England and who both have children from previous marriages to men, received the first formal blessing of a same-sex partnership in a C of E service.
The Rev Andrew Dotchin, who prayed over them, claims that ‘Their love helps them to be more faithful Christians, and their love helps other people to understand that God is generous and no one is left outside.’
Response
If this event comes up in conversation, how do we respond? Should we avoid controversy and make a non-committal answer, or should we be open and say that it is a symbol of the decay and apostasy prevalent in the West’s mainstream churches?
In ‘Truth-Telling as Subversive Obedience’, Old Testament theologian Walter Brueggermann invites us to become courageous, obedient speakers of truth ‘because our lives depend on it’. Christians have to live truthful lives, even if doing so can get us into hot water.
In hot water is where the Rev Brett Murphy found himself. When the Rev Canon Dr Rachel Mann was appointed Archdeacon of Bolton and Salford in June, Mr Murphy made what were described as ‘intentionally derogatory and disrespectful’ remarks. He said that the ‘radical rainbow activist’ Dr Mann, who claims to be a lesbian transwoman, ‘is in fact, biologically, a bloke, who identifies and lives as a woman’. This brought serious threats of disciplinary action. Mr Murphy has since left the C of E and is now ministering in the Free Church of England.
Christians have to live truthful lives, even if doing so can get us into hot water.
This is typical of the C of E’s direction of travel, but the Anglicans are not alone. Increasingly the mainstream denominations of the West are becoming more woke. Biblical Christians, whether or not they are members of those denominations, are increasingly put in the position of having to respond to the woke church.
Why is this happening?
How is it that what was once the hidden activity of a small minority has become a wedge issue splitting denominations?
The groundwork behind the acceptance of LGBTQ rights had already been laid when the general public accepted that sex was primarily about personal pleasure, and children and family were an optional extra. The fulfilment of one’s desires became the most important step in self-authentication, and if true for straights why not for homosexuals?
The homosexual lobby realised the circumstances were ripe and, grasping that politics is downstream of culture, set about altering the culture. We cannot overemphasise the role played by the media and entertainment industry in gaining acceptance for homosexuality. Why turn to boring priests and pastors for moral guidance when there are attractive pop singers, actors and sports personalities to give a lead?
The word homosexual was dropped and replaced by ‘gay’. Homosexual is a cold, clinical word while gay is warm and happy, and was assiduously used in the media. To gain sympathy, LGBTQ rights were compared to civil rights. Homosexuality and race are two entirely different things but an on-board media unquestioningly accepted and promoted their equivalence.
Why turn to boring priests and pastors for moral guidance when there are attractive pop singers, actors and sports personalities to give a lead?
Politicians, seeing which way the tide of public opinion was moving, began passing legislation, first permitting and then protecting and promoting LGBTQ issues. Social conservatives, Christian and secular, were decisively outmanoeuvred.
The Bible and Creation
Why not just accept what has happened and try to quietly live Christian lives as best we can in a hostile environment? Because homosexuality is merely the presenting symptom; the ultimate issue is the authority of Scripture. The Bible teaches us what being made in the image of God means and it is clear that homosexual practices run against the teaching of Scripture. No amount of theological gymnastics can make the Bible approve of what it unambiguously condemns.
Homosexual marriage and the transgender social contagion mark more than the success of the progressives in restructuring society; they overthrow Christianity by rejecting the authority of God and denying the nature of creation. To use the Roman Catholic phrase, homosexuality is ‘intrinsically disordered’; it is not as God structured creation.
The Christian believes every atom of creation was brought into being and is sustained by God and has meaning in relation to God. As Abraham Kuyper said, ‘There is not a thumbs-breadth of all creation of which God does not say, “Mine”.’ To accept homosexuality is to accept that creation is inert and has no relationship to God. This assumes creation exists on its own and its moral laws can be fashioned howsoever we wish.
To use the Roman Catholic phrase, homosexuality is ‘intrinsically disordered’; it is not as God structured creation.
Homosexual marriage and gender ideology have become symbols of the rejection of Christianity. Homosexuality is no more a sin than other sins, but when it comes to be accepted and praised in society and seen as a matter of pride, and the Church chooses to bless it, we have abandoned the essential truthfulness of the faith.
Christians who accept progressive ideology end up either rejecting Christianity completely, or so weakening their belief that their faith becomes little more than ritual performance art with Christian phrases empty of content.
How to react?
We must acknowledge the seriousness of the situation and do our best to resist it within our denomination. If we have little or no impact, we have to accept the painful truth that our presence in the denomination is legitimising their departure from the faith. If so, look for a congregation and a communion where the fight for biblical orthodoxy has not been lost and where it is possible to take a stand without being isolated on the margins.
Leaving a denomination where you have worshipped and served for decades is not easy, as I can attest from personal experience. To gain an understanding of what this might mean, you could read David J Randall’s ‘A Sad Departure’, the story of a pastor who for 40 years served in the Church of Scotland but understood he had to leave. Of particular value is the chapter ‘To Leave or Not to Leave’ in which he weighs up the pros and cons of this most difficult of decisions.
The Rev. Dr Campbell Campbell-Jack is a retired Church of Scotland minister; now a member of the Free Church of Scotland. Check out his many incisive articles on his blog,A Grain of Sand.
