Sex, war and the Word
It is interesting how people reveal their prejudices by the words they use. So, to A.N. Wilson (‘Holy Sage’, 18/25 December) those who oppose homosexuals taking high office in the Church of England are ‘bigots’, while those in favour are ‘enthusiasts’.
He argues that because the Church has changed its position in the past towards such things as pacifism and sexual abstinence except for the purposes of reproduction (both demanded by the early Church), it is therefore possible to ‘move on’ in other areas as well, e.g., in the case of homosexual clergy. We need to make a distinction, however, between the Bible (the word of God) and extra-biblical writings (the words of men). According to the Bible, neither Jesus nor John the Baptist enjoined soldiers to give up the military life if they wished to become their followers (e.g., Matthew viii 5-10, Luke iii 14), and Paul encouraged married couples to enjoy a full and active sexual life (I Cor vii 3).
The Church changed the word of God on these matters and therefore we are free to disregard its teaching. Homosexual activity, on the other hand, is forbidden in the Bible, which we are not at liberty to alter or disregard. It is unhelpful for Mr Wilson to mock as ‘pious’ those Christians who are attempting (sometimes struggling) to obey the whole of God’s word, even the difficult bits. The fact that theirs are the churches that are full he dismisses as irrelevant.
Virginia Price Evans
Whitland, Carmarthenshire
On the issue of money (and for that matter status and power), Church teaching has remained consistent down the millennia. No Church leader of any substance would condone the practice of today’s loan sharks and the Church continues to preach against the love of money.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in