Brownson
sets out to find the moral logic behind the same-sex statements in
the Bible. Interpretation is the issue. “We do not interpret
rightly any single
passage of Scripture until we locate the text
within this larger fabric of meaning in Scripture as a whole.” (9)
Underlying values and core principles must be sought.
“...When
interpreting scriptural commands or prohibitions, we must ask not
only what is commanded or prohibited but why. The
reason for asking why emerges when we attempt to apply the commands
and prohibitions of Scripture in new and diverse contexts.” (259)
Christians
disagree as to the why of same sex prohibition.
Traditionalists
refer to divinely intended gender complemenarity, discerned in the
anatomical and personality differences between male and female.
Brownson argues, “The biological differences between the sexes seem
a rather slender basis on which to build an entire marriage ethic.”
(22)
Traditionalists
say the “one flesh” union in Gen. 2:24 is the joining of male and
female. Brownson argues that “one flesh” actually refers to
kinship and therefore does not preclude committed, loving same-sex
relationships.
Brownson
also argues that what Paul prohibits in Romans 1 is not loving,
committed same-sex relationships but those of excessive and
self-centered desire – lustful ones.
When
Paul writes about what is “natural” in Romans 1, Brownson says,
“...it is clear that Paul is not operating with the modern sense of
sexual orientation here.” (229) Paul speaks of “leaving behind”
their own true nature for same sex relationships. If same sex
attraction is a person's true nature, Paul is not talking about them
in Romans.
“We
must reckon with the fact that what we are confronting here is a
dimension of human experience that is unaddressed and unanticipated
by the biblical writers – Jews or Christians – in the ancient
world...” (232) “Over the course of human history we have
encountered questions that take us beyond the assumptions and
problems envisioned by the biblical writers themselves, and these new
questions and problems have forced us to reread the text and to probe
more deeply for answers.” (104,5)
Brownson
says the central problem that he has confronted in his book is “the
fact that the New Testament does not envision the kind of committed,
mutual, lifelong, loving, moderated gay and lesbian unions that are
emerging today.” (251) “Writers in the first century, including
Paul, did not look at same-sex eroticism with the understanding of
sexual orientation that is commonplace today.” (166)
Brownson
comments on the other vice lists in the Bible, “...they single out
stereotypically abhorrent behavior that is widely regarded in the
community with condemnation, ridicule, or rejection. Hence they are
of limited use in the morally more nuanced conversation taking place
in the church today about long-term committed same-sex
relationships.” (275) Of these passages Brownson concludes, “The
evidence suggests that there are no forms of moral logic underpinning
these passages that clearly and unequivocally forbid all contemporary
forms of committed same-sex intimate relationships.” (277)
But
Brownson adds, “Elements of personal experience factor largely into
this discussion as well...” (263) He is quick to point out that he
began to rethink his position on homosexuality five years ago when
his eighteen-year-old son revealed he thought he was gay. Prior to
his “rethinking,” Brownson had taken a moderate, traditionalist
position on the issue, that, while homosexual orientation was
not sinful, homosexual behavior was. (11)
Brownson
notes that there are issues he has not addressed in this book, for
example ordination of gay and lesbians and their acceptance as
Christian leaders.
Brownson
envisions “that gay and lesbian committed unions might actually
find affirmation and support within the life of a church that seeks
to be faithful to the gospel.” (253) He writes, “I am convinced
that the church needs to move away from an interpretation of
Scripture that assumes that the Bible teaches a normative form of
biological or anatomical gender complementarity.” (278)
Brownson's
book is long and, although logically written out, is complex and will
probably not be read by the majority of laypeople in the RCA. I have
provided a review for those who are looking for something like a
layperson's synopsis of the book.
I
must also point out that I do not agree with Brownson's vision for
the future of the church. However, I do not have the theological
expertise to critique his argument. I must leave that to other
theologians within the RCA.
James
V. Brownson is the James and Jean Cook Professor of New Testament at
Western Theological Seminary in Holland, Michigan, a seminary of the
Reformed Church in America. For eight years he has served as dean of
that institution. He is an ordained minister in the Reformed Church
in America. You can follow his blog at
http://jimbrownson.wordpress.com/
Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 300 pages.
No comments:
Post a Comment