Archive for the ‘Gay Marriage’ Category

Justin Welby depressed at Greenbelt about Gay Marriage: 2 September

September 2, 2016

Justin Welby is depressed about gay marriage. On Saturday, at Greenbelt, he was interviewed by Kate Botley. He was delightful, engaging, humorous, positive. He talked about himself, when asked, honestly and humbly. He talked about the Church with love and hope. He emphasised the church being filled with the Holy Spirit. He talked about Jesus and how he, Justin, has to, and delights in, talk about Jesus. In South Sudan in a Cathedral with the dead bodies of some of the staff in plastic bodies outside, he talked about Jesus. What else can you do?

Then a question was asked about gay marriage. As Justin answered a dark cloud seemed to grow and grow over him. He was no longer expressing hope and love, but heaviness, anxiety, depression. He didn’t seem to see or have much faith for a way forward. He talked at length about how homophobia is not on and what the Church has been doing and how hard the issue is. Very hard. Very very hard. Gloom.

Justin seemed to forget his guiding principle of talking about Jesus. Yes! Talk about Jesus and gay marriage. That’s part of the way forward. We’ve talked enough about Leviticus and Romans and how we all feel about gay marriage. We’re Christians, for God sake! We follow the Christ. Let’s talk about Jesus and gay marriage. When we read through the Gospels what light do they shed, about gay marriage? My reflection on doing this is at This is one view. Let’s all do it and see what comes.

Justin seemed to forget about being assured that the Holy Spirit is in the Church, leading us into all truth, including the truth about gay marriage. Let’s also listen to what the Holy Spirit is saying to the Church of England. Justin knows about guidance and prophecy and discernment. He just needs to bring out his knowledge and say ‘Let’s work out how to listen to the Spirit and then do it. Let’s aim to be people like those in Acts who came to being able to say “It seems good to the Holy Spirit and to us that…” Let’s all be open to the Spirit surprising us.‘ My reflection on this, for what it’s worth, is at

All Justin has to do is be true to himself, talk about Jesus and the Holy Spirit, and smile and relax. Justin wants ‘good disagreement.’ On Saturday he was so taken up with saying what he thought needed to be said officially that he missed a lovely example of good disagreement.

The question at Greenbelt was ‘My partner and I will be married next year. I know God will be blessing our relationship. I know the Church won’t now be blessing us. When do you think the Church will be able to?’ All delivered in grace and good humour.

Justin could have said ‘Thank you for your gracious attitude. You’re not castigating the Church for being homophobic and unjust. You’re accepting, with regret, where the Church is now. You want the Church to move ahead on this. You envisage it taking some time yet. Your attitude is lovely. You have given us a great example of good disagreement. And no, I don’t know when (or if) the Church of England will move ahead as you want. Jesus doesn’t know when He’s going to come again. Only the Father knows. There are some things the Archbishop of Canterbury doesn’t know either! If we can all have your gracious patient attitude we may well come to agree sooner than if we castigate each other. Part of the trouble is that people get up on their high horses to discuss this. Let’s ban the high horses, listen to Jesus and to the Holy Spirit. Amen?’

Peace and joy be with you Justin.

Roger Harper


Paris Attcks: We shall not be moved. Nous restons en place. 14 November

November 14, 2015

After the murderous bombings in Paris what now?

The day after the July 7 bombings I was in London, sitting on a near empty Tune train, pulling into one sparsely peopled station after another. I felt afraid, as did everyone else. There was hardly any talking between us few passengers.

From somewhere inside me came the old protest song ‘We shall not be moved.’ I sang it quietly to myself. ‘We shall not, we shall not be moved.’ The song bolstered my confidence, quietened my fear, strengthened my determination to keep travelling where the bombers had attacked. ‘Just like a tree that’s planted by the riverside, we shall not be moved.’

 The thought of singing out loud came to me. I wasn’t bold enough to do it. Apart from having a notoriously bad singing voice, I worried that the scattered few passengers would think me odd, at least.

 Now I wish I had sung out. Maybe someone would have understood. Maybe it would have helped a fellow passenger as it had done me. Maybe it would even have spread…

 WE SHALL NOT, WE SHALL NOT BE MOVED. We shall not be moved from eating out in our city centres. We shall not be moved from going to concerts and football matches. We shall not be moved from living in a free and open society. We shall not give in to the terrorists’ aim to make us terrorised. We shall act as unterrorised, as normal, as free.

 The public response after the Charlie Hebdo killings was the same. People took to the streets, holding pens. We shall not be moved from publishing and reading satire, of anything and everything.

 Now the French Government is calling people to stay indoors. Communal events are closed. No street demonstrations are allowed until Thursday. Is this the right response?

 I understand the need to keep people safe. Parisians must be stunned by shock. Eating out now, celebrating over food, could feel disrespectful to the many dead and injured.

 Yes, let those who need to stay at home and mourn do so. But, please, let those who want to go out, who want to find and create solidarity, who want to sing ‘We shall not be moved…’ also do so, as they did in Paris and other towns at the beginning of this year.

Please keep the friendly football match between England and France on Tuesday. Maybe the stadium will resound, maybe even in French as well as English: ‘We shall not, we shall not be moved!’ ‘Nous restons, nous restons en place!’

Roger Harper

PS I’ll be at Wembley on Tuesday for the match!

The Anglican Communion, dominated by extremists: 7 February

February 7, 2015

Anglican extremists? The two words seem incompatible. Except about gay marriage.

Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, was talking on Desert Island Discs, BBC Radio 4, 26 December. His reply to a question about gay relationships included: ‘It’s something that, as you go round the Communion, and having visited all the provinces, I’m very aware of this, it is seen by many as an absolutely central understanding of obedience to Christ in both directions either in favour or against.’

Some people, our Archbishop says ‘many’, see gay marriage as a Primary Issue. It has to be either promoted or resisted as a matter of priority. Not to promote or resist means disobedience to Jesus. It is impossible for these Anglicans to compromise on this. Here they stand, insisting that they can do no other

How can either camp be so sure that they are on Jesus’ side on this issue, when it is clear to them and to everyone that fellow Christians, fellow Anglicans, disagree strongly with them? The plain fact that not everyone sees things the same way ought to be enough for them to tone down, pipe down, climb down, at least a little. Add ‘but, of course we might be wrong…’ But no! The extreme, either YES or NO must be proclaimed.

Where does Jesus say in the Gospels that gay marriage is either absolutely necessary or absolutely forbidden? Nowhere so clearly. Some of what Jesus said points one way, some the other way. (See the detail at On what do the Anglican extremists base their differing views of what Jesus is saying?

Paul and Leviticus give the clear impression that we should not develop gay marriage, but their view is not necessarily the view of Jesus for all time and places, notably for this time and place. Jesus said there were other things he had to say which his hearers at the time could not bear. ‘You need to welcome Gentiles to become part of God’s people, without insisting that they keep the whole Jewish Law.’ ‘Slavery is not part of life as God wants it, but something to be outlawed.’ We know now Jesus has indeed said both of these since speaking before his death, Both of these are also against the recorded view of Paul and Leviticus etc. How can the extremists be so categorical that Jesus is or is not speaking about gay marriage in a way that we could not have borne before?

Part of me wants to shout these questions and more to the extremists. ‘Stop being so dogmatic, so blinkered, so arrogant, so extreme! You’re Anglicans for goodness sake. Take yourself with a pinch of salt.’

I am learning, though, that the approach of gentle curiosity is more Jesus-like and more effective. I need to control the anger at both sides callously tearing apart the body of Christ, and, without threatening, invite them to explain. ‘This is an absolutely central part of you being obedient to Jesus. That’s a bit of puzzle to many of us in the middle. Please can you explain it a bit more?’

The conflicting extremes dominate at present. The puzzled middle ground, where even more Anglicans stand, needs to resist and question both extremes.

Maybe Justin Welby can follow up his listening with some questioning along these lines.

Roger Harper

The US Church – The Good, The Bad, and the Divided: 1 November

November 1, 2014

The Church is America is stronger than it has ever been. At the time of the American Revolution and early in the 19th Century only about 15% of the population were church-going. 19th Century Canadians were much more church-going, peaking at nearly 90% of the population. In the 20th Century Canadians turned away from church dramatically, as did Europeans. Canadian church-going is now well under 20%. Through the 20th Century more Americans turned to the church. American church-going is now about 40% of the population. A huge number compared to the UK.

The US Church is a free-market Church. Churches, like everything else, have to compete in the marketplace. This raises the standard of communication and organisation. To attract members church leaders need to communicate clearly and engagingly. To retain members churches need to make people feel part of something good. We in the UK learn much from the US and have more to learn.

The large US Church contains all sorts and much that is excellent. Recently I came across Greg Boyd, Pastor of Woodland Hills Church in Minnesota and founder of ReKnew, an organisation and website for developing a post-Christendom Christianity, Jesus-centred, non-violent, open-minded. Here’s part of their Manifesto:

It’s our conviction that the fearful, dogmatic rigidity that characterizes so much of contemporary Evangelicalism reflects an idolatrous relationship with beliefs, which in turn causes many to become hostile and unloving when debating doctrinal issues. We are convinced God is more concerned with the love with which we debate than the content of what we debate. (See more at:

‘Yes, yes, yes!’ I want to shout. Greg speaks and writes intelligently, engagingly, forthrightly. He and his church are definitely among the good.

Rachel Held Evans is a very popular US Christian blogger and book writer. She too communicates great truth intelligently and winsomely. Sometimes she harps on humourlessly about her main topics, but most weeks she has something well worth reading. She’s a good ‘un.

Other Yank good ‘uns more well known in the UK include Tony Campolo, Bill Johnson, Jim Wallis, Richard Foster, Philip Yancey, Mark Virkler, Bill Hybels and, (of course if you’re a regular reader) Edward Fudge. I have learnt and continue to learn great things from these good inspiring people. Please add to the list through the comments.

There is another side to the US Church. Greg Boyd set up ReKnew partly to counteract the strident Conservatives. Greg refers particularly to Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church, Seattle. Mark has been a champion of muscular Protestantism – focusing on the call to repent above all else. He has been refreshingly gutsy, with a likeable cheekiness. He has attacked anyone who questions hell as eternal torment. He has argued that care for creation is irrelevant because the planet is going to be trashed when Jesus returns. He has insisted that women submit to their husbands. Mark came to the UK and was interviewed by Justin Brierley on Premier Radio and Christianity magazine. Mark was bombastic and aggressive to Justin, and then aggrieved when Justin broadcast the interview.

Mark Driscoll has run into mounting criticism, especially of his leadership style. On October 15 Mark resigned from Mars Hill Church, confessing ‘to past pride, anger and a domineering spirit.’ Yesterday Mars Hill Church announced it is disbanding. The 13 churches in its network will either run independently or will close. May this be a warning to those who promote hard attitudes and hard doctrine.

Gay marriage is causing a deep crisis in the US Church. Rachel Held Evans is all for it. Mark Driscoll is all against it. Many more people are lined up on either side. (I can’t see anything Greg Boyd has written about gay marriage, which would be interesting.) The conflict seems to be fierce. The conservatives are targeted and tarred as ‘hating’ gay people. The liberals are targeted and tarred as pseudo Christians. My guess is that there are a large number of Americans, as there are Brits, who are unsure about gay marriage, not happy with either extreme. The middle ground needs to gain confidence, and speak up. I hope can help.

I hope the US Church in general will continue to thrive, and will find a way of uniting, in spirit, around Jesus.

Generous Spaciousness – Middle Ground Voices. Alleluia!: 12 June

June 12, 2014

Wendy VanderWal Gritter has produced what sounds like an excellent ‘middle ground’ book about the church and gay marriage: Generous Spaciousness (Brazos Press May 2014) The publishers write: ‘This book offers a framework for discussing diversity in a gracious way, showing that the church can be a place that welcomes a variety of perspectives on the complex matter of human sexuality. It also offers practical advice for implementing generous spaciousness in churches and organizations.’

Wendy Gritter leads New Direction Ministries, linked to the Seventh Day Adventist Church in Canada. ‘New Direction Ministries began in 1985 as a small Bible study for people of faith addressing personal questions of sexuality. As the ministry developed, counselling, support groups, and equipping for the church were offered…In the twenty plus years that the ministry has been serving the individual and the church, our society and culture have changed dramatically. Having been a member ministry of Exodus International since the beginning, New Direction left Exodus in 2007. This decision was made in light of our distinct identity and no longer fitting an ex-gay paradigm of ministry.

The transition from being an ex-gay ministry to embracing an identity as bridge-builders in the midst of diversity around faith and sexuality has not been a quick or easy one. Such a transition can also raise suspicion as to our true motives and true activities as a ministry.

In the Spring quarter of 2010, the New Direction board concluded a season of conversation with key stakeholders of the ministry. The outcome of this time of reflection on our identity and purpose was an affirmation of our posture as bridge-builders in the context of complexity, diversity, and tension that surrounds the integration of faith and sexuality.’

A good, extensive review by Andrew Goddard is at

My website ‘Gay Marriage Maybe’ could also have been named ‘Making Space: Gay People and the Church.’ A few years ago I wrote a book proposal with that name making a similar case to this website. The Editor of one Evangelical publisher reported with regret that ‘even your Evangelical via media was deemed by the Board too politically sensitive.’

Since then we have had more argument and schisms are more likely, partly because the middle ground voice has not been properly heard. I hope and pray that Wendy Gritter’s book makes many people realise that there is another voice alongside and critiquing the convinced on both sides of the debate.

Another great middle ground teacher is Brian Maclaren. (More to the liberal edge of middle ground but sympathetic to Conservatives) Wise, helpful words from Brian are at Brian gives an excellent perspective on how to reassure Conservatives, how to keep relationships in disagreement, how denominations could work out a corporate way forward, and more.

Roger Harper

Blessing Gay Marriage in the Church of England? The Pilling Report: 10 February

February 10, 2014

In November last year an official, but not authoritative, Church of England Report recommended allowing ‘celebrations’ of faithful same sex relationships. The Report was from the House of Bishops Working Group on Human Sexuality, chaired, not by a Bishop, but by Sir Joseph Pilling. The Report is known as The Pilling Report.

We have here a typical Anglican, English, fudge. A Report set up by Bishops but distant enough from Bishops for them to evade responsibility. A Report which satisfies the need to show that due attention has been paid by our episcopal leaders, after which nothing further need be done for a while. A Report which is a finger up to the wind about blessing gay marriage. If there is a strong current in that direction, the Bishops can ride it. If not, no face lost.

The Report conveys this message:
We have listened carefully to a wide variety of people and not come to a clear common mind about the permissibility of homosexual sexual practice for English Anglicans. (One of us considers there is a clear Biblical mind and disagrees with our not coming to a common mind.)

We recommend that
The whole Church of England also engages in a process of careful listening to a wide variety of people and views on homosexuality
In the meantime, clergy and parishes who are so minded be given permission to conduct semi-formal blessings for same sex couples. There is to be no authorised rite nor push towards such blessings, but, equally, there is to be no outlawing of such blessings.’
(The Report uses ‘celebrations’ instead of ‘blessings’ but, as many people have noted, ‘blessings’ is the usual terminology. cf para 481)

Why more listening to people and views when listening has not led to agreement?

The Report states: ‘The problem we are unable, collectively, to solve is between the belief that God’s purposes revealed in Scripture are eternal, unchanging and consistent, and the plain fact that faithful, prayerful, Christians who aspire for their lives to be governed by Scripture, do not agree about the implications of the scriptural texts for same sex relationships.’ (para 58)

The problem has remained despite much listening. The Report does not explain what is to be gained by more listening by the Church as a whole, other than a deeper sense of fellowship across disagreement. This deeper fellowship is, to some extent, helpful but the experience of the Group is that it does not ‘solve the problem’ of disagreement.

What might solve the problem of disagreement?

Two complementary approaches:

A deliberate process of listening to Jesus, focusing on both His recorded teaching and practice, and on His present voice brought to His Church by the Holy Spirit. This fresh approach to authority might lead to a fresh sense of agreement.

As part of this process, a deliberate focus on whether homosexuality is a matter about which we can agree to disagree. If there is no fresh sense of agreement about the issue, we might have a fresh appreciation of how primary the issue is for Jesus and His Church.

For a detailed explanation see:

May the listening process recommended by the Report be more than a careful listening to differing views among us. May it be also and primarily a careful, humble, listening to Jesus and to the Holy Spirit, both about ‘the problem’ and about what we are do when we disagree about ‘the problem.’

Roger Harper

Gay Marriage at New Wine and Greenbelt Festivals: 2 September

September 2, 2013

The Bible is against gay marriage, end of debate. Discrimination against gay people, including marriage discrimination, is clearly unjust and out of date: end of debate. These two positions dominate the Christian terrain, with New Wine generally preaching the former and Greenbelt the latter.

This year I had good days at both New Wine, Newark, and Greenbelt, Cheltenham. Spending time with friends, worshipping, listening, thinking. Each is good in its own way.

New Wine is the more coherent, uniting around a Charismatic and semi-Evangelical approach. People camp in ‘villages’, organised communities mostly of people from the same area. People cook and eat together. At key times most people gather in the same place, with a couple of smaller alternative venues.

At New Wine, women are welcomed into leadership. The usual argument for such a welcome is that the Biblical principles of the equality of the sexes, as demonstrated by Jesus and proclaimed in broad terms by Paul, carry greater weight than the Biblical prohibitions on women speaking in public and not wearing head-covering. The specific restrictions on women are shown to be for that 1st Century culture. The principles of equality are shown to be for all times and places, as far as local culture allows, without making the Gospel seem ridiculous or out of the question. In our culture restricting church leadership to men seems ridiculous and out of the question. It is a serious hindrance to the Gospel. The New Wine leadership would probably say that this is a truth into which the Holy Spirit has led.

At New Wine, gay people are not welcomed into marriage. There was no specific seminar on the subject when I was there, but the implications of what some speakers said were that the Bible is against gay sexual activity, and therefore against gay marriage. Last year this was made explicit by a speaker from the Evangelical Alliance. (see

But could it be that the Holy Spirit is leading the Church in a similar way in which He led over women in leadership? Could it be that the principles of equality and of life-long exclusive faithfulness carry greater weight than the particular Biblical gender prohibitions? In our culture, where excluding gay people from marriage now seems ridiculous and out of the question, making a considerable hindrance to the Gospel, is the Holy Spirit leading us to apply fundamental principles over culturally specific instances? It would make sense for New Wine, who stress the current activity of the Holy Spirit, to at least consider these questions. But the indications I heard were that no such consideration is happening, at least publicly.

I had a private conversation with a leading young theologian and speaker at New Wine. He questioned the whole approach of distinguishing between fundamental principles and possibly culturally specific instances. I replied that that was easy. Jesus distinguished between the weightier matters of the Law and the specific Laws of tithing herbs and spices. The distinction made by Jesus on this occasion is part of the foundation of all our thinking as Christians. The distinction is not for that instance only but for us to make more generally. The theologian was not convinced. He didn’t think that I was drawing a legitimate conclusion. I think he is aware that emphasising such a distinction would work in favour of gay marriage.

Greenbelt is different, less coherent. People camp as individuals. A few cook; many buy food on site. On Sunday morning most people gather in one place for a Communion. Most of the time there is a multiplicity of venues, approaches, formats. One cause around which Greenbelt officially seems to unite, though, is gay rights.

Steve Chalke was welcomed and applauded for his support for gay marriage. This was not the main point of his seminar, though. ‘An Issue, an Issue, we all fall down’ was the title of the main seminar addressing gay rights – by Mark Oakley, Canon of St Paul’s Cathedral. Mark described himself as gay and ‘a Greenbelt virgin’, delighted with the new experience. His message was simple. Gay rights are an issue on which we must not fall down but make a stand. We Christians should be championing the full inclusion of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people. To do anything else is to indulge in deception, discrimination, and despising of fellow human beings.

Mark talked about the deception which for him began when he offered himself to be selected for ordained Anglican ministry. From the beginning he had to hide his sexuality. He said that he was encouraged in this deception by people in Church leadership, including Bishops. He bemoaned the continuing deception of Bishops who privately support gay priests and publicly rule out gay marriage.

Mark did not talk about his own decision to hide his sexuality. Why did he not simply pursue another career or join or establish a more pro-gay Church? Mark spoke with considerable wit and the audience responded warmly to him. Part of this, however, was his highlighting the ‘victim’ part of his own story and ignoring the ‘responsible adult’ part. Winsomely saying ‘poor me’ is likely to draw out sympathy from a sympathetic Christian audience.

Mark was strident in blaming others, particularly Bishops. He went on to talk of General Synod as containing ‘bed wetting depressives.’ Hardly an attitude of respect for Church authority, or of Christian grace for brothers and sisters with whom he disagrees.

Mark spoke with little regard for the serious concerns of others. He blandly adopted the gay rallying call for the inclusion of bisexual people, without explaining how marriage is to be expanded to include sexually active bisexuals. On the face of it, gay marriage, as heterosexual marriage, excludes any sexual activity other than with the spouse.

Mark must know that the latest statement from the Bishops is based entirely on Jesus’ description of marriage as between a man and a woman ( ) but he failed to mention it. The words and life of Jesus are the foundation and cornerstone of our Christian understanding. The Bishops commend building our understanding of marriage entirely on Jesus’ explicit description of marriage. I think there are other words of Jesus which should also be considered in this context (see Mark chose to ignore the words of Jesus and of the Bishops and instead make below-the-belt swipes at his own Church leadership.

I think Mark, and others like him, have a good point. The Biblical, Jesus, principles of loving our neighbour as we love ourselves could well be leading the Church in our culture to welcome gay marriage. Gay marriage is not a threat to heterosexual marriage, certainly not to Christian faith as a whole. We need to look afresh at the whole of what Jesus said and the Holy Spirit is saying, messages which support gay marriage and those which undermine it. Strident nasty arguments which demonise those seen as on the other side are not to be applauded. Nor is hiding behind a ‘Bible says’ wall.

Roger Harper

Big News – Gay Exodus No More: 20 June

June 20, 2013

Exodus International, the US umbrella organisation and spokespeople for ministry to change gay orientation, has apologised for much of its attitude and approach and has shut itself down. See and
Alan Chambers, the last President of Exodus International, writes:

‘Please know that I am deeply sorry. I am sorry for the pain and hurt many of you have experienced. I am sorry that some of you spent years working through the shame and guilt you felt when your attractions didn’t change. I am sorry we promoted sexual orientation change efforts and reparative theories about sexual orientation that stigmatized parents. I am sorry that there were times I didn’t stand up to people publicly “on my side” who called you names like sodomite—or worse. I am sorry that I, knowing some of you so well, failed to share publicly that the gay and lesbian people I know were every bit as capable of being amazing parents as the straight people that I know. I am sorry that when I celebrated a person coming to Christ and surrendering their sexuality to Him that I callously celebrated the end of relationships that broke your heart. I am sorry that I have communicated that you and your families are less than me and mine.

More than anything, I am sorry that so many have interpreted this religious rejection by Christians as God’s rejection. I am profoundly sorry that many have walked away from their faith and that some have chosen to end their lives. For the rest of my life I will proclaim nothing but the whole truth of the Gospel, one of grace, mercy and open invitation to all to enter into an inseverable relationship with almighty God.

I cannot apologize for my deeply held biblical beliefs about the boundaries I see in scripture surrounding sex, but I will exercise my beliefs with great care and respect for those who do not share them. I cannot apologize for my beliefs about marriage. But I do not have any desire to fight you on your beliefs or the rights that you seek. My beliefs about these things will never again interfere with God’s command to love my neighbor as I love myself.’

Chambers seems to acknowledge that the key problem was to make the secondary primary. The secondary issue of gay orientation became more important than the primary command to love our neighbour. He writes: ‘Our beliefs do not center on “sin” because “sin” isn’t at the center of our faith.’

Chambers also writes about not completely agreeing with the vocal sections in both the gay and Christian communities. He deems these sections, wrongly I believe, majorities. He sees himself now as an outsider to both sections. Alleluia! Join the crowd in the middle? See for more.

Roger Harper

Gay Marriage Maybe: 12 April

April 12, 2013

Today I created

‘A robust middle ground in Christian debate.’

Please join the conversation.

Roger Harper   

Thinking about Gay Marriage at New Wine Festival: 30 August

August 30, 2012

The day at New Wine wasn’t all about Hades. (see previous post) The theme of ‘Don’t be afraid. Go ahead with what you think. Don’t hold back,’ applied also to the vexed issue of Gay Marriage. (Some people would rather I write Gay ‘Marriage’ and I understand their reasons. But, for now, I’ll keep it simple.’)

A speaker from the Evangelical Alliance led a Seminar explaining that we need to support their opposition to Gay Marriage. He argued that such a step would be dismantling a ‘load-bearing wall’ – the whole house would collapse. Gay Marriage, for him, is totally against the teaching of the Bible. In legalising Gay Marriage, the Government would be criminalising those who oppose it. He painted a terrible picture of UK Christians persecuted by the State. He urged us to put our weight behind the campaign to stop this abomination, encouraging us that this is a battle that we Christians can win.

All the EA man said seemed to me exaggerated. Traditional, heterosexual, monogamous, marriage a load-bearing wall? Really? Will the whole structure of Christian faith and life collapse if this is altered? The more Biblical question is ‘Is this part of the foundation – which is Jesus?’ Did Jesus clearly oppose Gay Marriage? Hardly. Jesus said nothing specific about homosexuality, which was part of His culture. That’s a strong indication that this is not a load-bearing, primary issue. The rest of Jesus’ teaching needs to be explored to see what light it shines on the issue, before we look at other Bible texts. This is more important than scare-mongering about persecution to come.

Hearing this extreme view reminded me that all we seem to hear about Gay Marriage are extreme views: NO WAY! As Christians we must oppose this. Otherwise our whole Biblical faith is fatally weakened.’ ‘YES OF COURSE! As Christians we must promote this. Otherwise our faith in the liberating God counts for nothing.’ These two voices shout loud, bizarrely agreeing with each other that this is a Primary Issue over which Christians must make a stand. In the middle, I think, are many people thinking ‘Yes…, but.., ’ and secretly puzzled at why the extremists make it such a big deal. For those in the middle this is a Secondary Issue, whether they would use that language or not.

It was particularly disappointing to hear the Conservative Biblicist view at New Wine, which is a Charismatic, Holy Spirit, event. Charismatics are, surely, those who believe that the Spirit leads us into all truth. Jesus did not tell us that the Scriptures, the Torah, the Law, lead us into all truth, but the Holy Spirit. It was not the Scriptures which led the Church in Acts to include Gentiles without requiring them to observe the Jewish Law, it was the Holy Spirit. ‘It seems good to us and to the Holy Spirit..’ was how the decision was conveyed. ‘What is the Spirit saying?’ should be another key question. How is the Holy Spirit taking the words of Jesus and speaking them to us in our generation, perhaps in a way that Jesus’ followers could not have borne before?

The seminar left me thinking again about the need for a strong presentation of the central position, arguing that Gay Marriage is not a Primary Issue, making the teaching and life of Jesus foundational for this as for every issue, and exploring the various ways in which the Holy Spirit might be speaking to us, including through the rest of the Bible. I have thought seriously of making this presentation myself, through a book.

By the evening, Gay Marriage was far from my mind. Evening worship was wonderful, with a great focus on Jesus. Singing ‘Jesus the name high over all’ echoed with all I believe about Hades and had me standing with flowing tears (see previous post.) After the talk, as the Holy Spirit was invited again, a song in tongues bubbled up within, and kept repeating. When those aware of the Holy Spirit were invited to come for prayer ministry, I went forward. I was enjoying the song, not looking for anything particular, only responding to the invitation from the front.

The prayer minister prayed alongside me for a good time. He asked the Holy Spirit to let me know what I was singing. English words then came, words of praise and encouragement to speak out the truth. I returned to my seat and carried on in prayer and worship, sensing Jesus very close. Specific encouragement came to go ahead with the earlier thoughts of the book about Gay Marriage, with main points and a title, similar to what I have been thinking but with differences. From the autumn I will be working on ‘Loving Difference.’

I returned home much refreshed and energised. Many thanks to New Wine, to Jesus and to the Holy Spirit.

Roger Harper

PS Friends have pointed me to  This is a strong, lengthy, talk on Biblical reasons for supporting Gay Marriage. I haven’t listened to it yet, but am assured it is worth hearing.