Excerpts from an ABC Religion and Ethics program, broadcast 11 July, 2012:

(This interview followed another with a couple of Catholics who have a different view to mine. Transcript here .  Note: I’ve edited my part of the transcript to correct a few misspellings, and tidy up the wording).

Andrew West: But Christians aren’t unanimous in their views on same-sex marriage as producer Noel Debien found out when he spoke with the Rev. Dr Rowland Croucher, a Baptist minister and director of the John Mark Ministries.

Rowland Croucher: The Bible has nothing to say about homosexuality as an orientation. And the Bible has nothing to say about people of the same sex marrying. The Bible has some things to say about people of the same sex having fun together and that’s been proscribed but the Biblical theologians these days are saying that probably almost all of those contexts were related to either master-slave or soldier-captive or paedophile situations or religious contexts. There is nothing in the Bible about homosexuality per se and there’s nothing in the Bible that proscribes homosexual marriage.

Noel Debien: You’ve actually put your name in the Marriage Equality campaign together with leaders from the Quakers, Uniting Church leaders and other Christians who say they are okay with same-sex marriage. Does it surprise you that some Christian organisations are actively supporting the change to legislation to support same-sex marriage?

Rowland Croucher: It doesn’t surprise me at all for several reasons. The first  is that I’ve been listening to the stories of gay people. Unless we begin there with their experience I think we’re beginning in the wrong place, even if we have a high view of the Bible. And I’m particularly impressed by people like Justice Michael Kirby, Dr Stuart Edser the gay Christian psychologist, Senator Penny Wong; people like those who are speaking from their own experience. These are the people we should begin our conversation with not heterosexual males and particularly celibate heterosexual males. Heterosexual males making judgements as to how non-heterosexual people should live, it’s not only odd it’s unfair.

Noel Debien: Rowland you’ve been married over 50 years. What has actually moved you as an evangelical to actually speak out on this?

Rowland Croucher: I’ve listened to gay people. I’m listening to the biblical theologians who even amongst the evangelicals are saying that the Bible itself is not the only authority here. Tradition and history, where sometimes in history there were in the Christian church homosexual relationships celebrated. We have what we call the Wesleyan quadrilateral —Bible, tradition, reason, experience—and we must ask how do all of these relate? On this one I begin with experience. These 4%+ people made in the image of God; what’s their experience of the church, what’s their personal experience and so on. It’s not a happy one and the suicide rate amongst these people is awful.

Unless someone begins there, where I think Jesus would have begun… simply using the Bible or even tradition or reason is not the place to start. I’m also listening to the biblical scholars who tell me that there are at least eight different models of marriage in the Bible, not just monogamous marriage. Polygamous marriage was probably fairly normal and there’s also levirate marriage – marrying the wife of your deceased brother. Why we select simply one man, one woman as the only model, it puzzles me when the Bible has all these other models as well. Faithfulness? Yes. For life? Yes. A covenant? Yes. I’m happy with all of those so long as we’re not locked into one particular kind of biblical notion of marriage when you’ve got all of these others.

Noel Debien: On your website John Mark Ministries you’ve described yourself as a coming-out ex-Pharisee. What exactly do you mean by that?

Rowland Croucher: The Pharisees were people who if you like knew the Bible and missed the point. And in my work with clergy, quite frankly the people who know the Bible best are most likely to miss the point. You can know the text of scripture without experiencing the spirit of God’s word in scripture. With Pharisees repentance precedes acceptance. With Jesus it’s the other way around. Pharisees are people who say you conform to our view, our understanding of what the Bible says then you’ll be acceptable around here. Jesus says I accept you now let’s work on the process of change maybe. My favourite preaching ploy is to ask a congregation what did Jesus say to the woman caught in the act of adultery and I can read their lips: ‘Go and sin no more’. They’ve forgotten that Jesus said something before that:  ‘I do not condemn you.’

Noel Debien: You’ve mentioned Jesus’ teaching, but there are those certainly in speaking to Bishop Comensoli and to Canon Lawyer Fr John Doherty, they both quoted Jesus quoting the book of Genesis and saying ‘the two shall become one flesh’. Now that’s a very persuasive argument to make that Jesus is quoting Genesis. How do you explain that?

Rowland Croucher: I have no problem with that. Jesus is quoting what is in fact the most common and normal marriage situation. But he’s not saying that’s the only one. He’s not proscribing polygamy; in fact the early church was polygamous. Only the bishops, it suggests in the Pastoral Epistles, should be monogamous…

Noel Debien: Of course, ‘bishops shall be the husband of one wife’ it says doesn’t it?

Rowland Croucher: That’s right. Jesus is not saying anything about the mode of marriage, what kind of marriage we’re talking about. He’s talking about the faithfulness of a man and a woman and he’s talking about that in the context of divorce. The fascinating question which an ethicist [Dr Lew Smedes] asks is why can’t we approach gay marriage the way we approached divorce? In the Catholic Church and in some very strict Anglican and Protestant and fundamentalist churches—divorce is just out. But if we approached gay marriage the same way we’ve approached divorce, in other words we’ve agreed that human nature being what it is, these sorts of things are going to happen, let’s be forgiving, let’s be filled with grace, let’s accept these people, counsel them, sure, but there shouldn’t be any proscription against people who’ve failed in their marriage or had a different life situation serving Christ as anybody else, any other sinner, would.

Andrew West: That’s the Baptist minister and theologian Dr Rowland Croucher speaking there with the producer Noel Debien.

And all those stories are available either as individual segments or the program as a whole at our home page on the RN website where you can also leave a comment. You can also follow us on Twitter @abcreligion. You can even follow me @andrewwestabc.

That is our program for this week. Thanks to producer Noel Debien.

~~~

Note from Rowland: I receive many communications (email, Facebook etc.) on this broad subject, and also in response to this radio program. Here’s one of the more considered responses, with Alan Austin’s comments (thanks Alan):

~~~

From a friend:

I listened to your contribution on the ABC’s Religion and Ethics program. I’ve listed a few reactions below:

*I agree that Jesus would not condemn, but whilst the ‘Pharisees’ only see the ‘do not sin’ side of the equation, Jesus gave the balance. Is there not a danger of going to the extreme of ‘unphariseeism’?

*Similarly, I appreciate your concern for the plight of homosexuals. I’m sure that they value your support, but are you emphasising their side of the issue at the expense of the dilemma on the other side?

*You say that the Bible says nothing on the subject of homosexuality. But the Bible says a great deal about the sanctity of marriage even to liken it to Christ’s relationship with the Church which is Christ’s bride; clearly no hint of a homosexual relationship here! And of course Ephesians 5 has much to say about the male/female marriage relationship. If nothing is said about homosexuality, isn’t it legitimate to conclude that the Bible sees marriage as heterosexual?

*You mentioned that the Bible mentions eight forms of marriage. I’m puzzled. Is homosexual marriage one of them?

*I assume you saw the ACL webcast on this issue. I thought that John Anderson made some good points. Where do you stand on lesbian/homosexual couples having children? What about the rights of the child? What about the evidence about children from these relationships being worse off and needing a mother/father influence? And the legal and emotional complications of not knowing the genetic parent? Is this change for society not such a major one that we need to take time for society to be educated about the issues involved?

*I think I’ve mentioned to you before that I have no problems with recognition of homosexual couples in a recognised legal union with the financial/legal protection that is available for married couples. But for the minority of homosexuals to change the meaning of marriage is, to me, the tail wagging the dog. Such a change makes a change in the meaning of my marriage and every (heterosexual) marriage Let’s think of another name for ‘civil union’.

*Do you really think that Jesus had homosexuals in mind when he said ‘the two shall be one flesh’? (You said that this was the common mode but inferred that the Bible/Jesus accepted other modes. You’ll get some reaction on that.)

May the Church indeed find wisdom, and the love and acceptance that we have known in Christ.

Blessings on you and Jan,

[Name withheld]

~~~

Responses:

Excellent questions. Precisely the issues the Judeo-Christian communities are now grappling with worldwide.

May I suggest there seem to be embedded beliefs in your comments and questions which are being reconsidered widely within the Church?

The first is the nature of homosexuality. Many today recognise that heterosexuality and homosexuality are equivalent concepts. They are God-given aspects of our nature – intrinsically good, but capable of being used sinfully.

God’s natural revelation through the various sciences shows that the range of sexual orientations – straight, gay and in-between – are natural, healthy, unchangeable and pose no threat to the continuation of the species or to anything else.

Both same-sex and opposite-sex activities can be destructive. So we need to discern what expressions of sexuality – gay, straight and bi – are acceptable and which ones aren’t.

Which brings us to the second assumption: Scripture condemns all same-sex activity.

Increasingly, scholars and theologians are showing us that the Church in recent generations has misinterpreted some passages.

The six ‘clobber texts’ on homosexuality, they say, do not prohibit all same-sex unions – just as the 330 warnings against heterosexual sins do not condemn all opposite-sex unions.

They suggest idolatrous, coercive, abusive, destructive acts are definitely prohibited in Scripture. But faithful marriage is God’s plan for everyone. (Happy to go through the passages, if you wish.)

A third assumption being reconsidered is that marriage must be one man and one woman. This has certainly been accepted by most churches for some generations. Accompanying this is the parallel belief that we have always held this view.

In fact, neither of these now seems correct. Scholars and theologians now acknowledge that the Bible does not teach one-man-one-woman as we have been brought up to believe.

Yes, eight forms of marriage are described in the Bible. Several other relationships for raising children outside formal marriage are also accepted.

And Church historians are showing us evidence of times when the Church happily blessed polygamous and same-sex unions.

Rethinking this issue should not unduly dismay us. Every generation, it seems, must confront the errors of earlier generations and correct them. There is a long list of things most denominations no longer believe and practice as we once did.

The challenge is to apply the teachings on same-sex – and opposite-sex behaviour – in light of Biblical scholarship and scientific knowledge about sexuality.

So, now, to your specific questions:

“Is there not a danger of going to the extreme of ‘unphariseeism’?”

“ …are you emphasising their side of the issue at the expense of the dilemma on the other side?”

Yes. There is a risk of extremism in both directions. We all need to be vigilant.

“ … isn’t it legitimate to conclude that the Bible sees marriage as heterosexual?”

Yes and no. Fortunately (for me) heterosexual marriage is permitted in Scripture. But it is not the only acceptable formula.

“Is homosexual marriage one of them?”

Yes, I believe so. The wide variations in family arrangements throughout Scripture show that Genesis 2:24 and Matthew 19 properly interpreted do not insist on just one partner of the opposite sex.

These passages do not deal with the question of number in a way that prohibits multiple spouses. Nor do they deal with the question of gender in a way that prohibits same-sex partners.

Regarding number, consider: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey.” Singular terms. One wife. One servant. One ox. One donkey. Clearly, in Scripture, singular often implies plural – and vice versa.

The Church faced a similar question regarding number 400 years ago. Biblical accounts of creating the sun are all singular. One sun to rule the day. One lesser light to rule the night. All references to the sun are singular. Always.

Does this exclude the possibility of multiple suns? Should the Church condemn anyone who claims there are other suns? Should Giordano Bruno have been burned alive in 1600?

Similarly, in the beginning He created them male and female. And Adam was made one flesh with Eve. Does this mean there cannot ever be any other union other than one man and one woman? And should the Church therefore exclude anyone who claims there are other possible unions?

The whole of the Bible affirms that God is cool with a wide range of unions other than one-man-one-woman. (Except for elders in the early Church who must have one wife.)

“Where do you stand on lesbian/homosexual couples having children? What about the rights of the child? What about the evidence about children from these relationships being worse off and needing a mother/father influence?

The evidence seems pretty clear that kids need both male and female adults taking a role in their nurture and upbringing. But these roles need not be confined to the biological parents.

Many children with a straight mother and father grow up with no significant contact with their workaholic father, or alcoholic mother. In contrast, many single parents bring up kids extremely well by ensuring they have regular contact with other supportive adults.

Similarly, many kids with two mums or two dads grow up with excellent relationships with adult carers and role models of both genders.

Have you seen this presentation by Zach Wahls? It’s impressive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSQQK2Vuf9Q

Most reputable research indicates that children with same-sex parents generally do better than children with opposite-sex biological parents, both in education and socialisation. This is probably a result of same-sex parents being aware they are in a minority, are pioneers, and hence are under scrutiny. So maybe when same-sex parents are accepted as normal and the pressure is off, test results will even out.

“Do you really think that Jesus had homosexuals in mind when he said ‘the two shall be one flesh’?

Yes, I think so. And he probably had homosexuals in mind when he spoke about eunuchs: “some were born that way …”  (Matthew 19)

But we cannot be certain. So it is vital we explore this whole issue with minds and hearts open to God’s truth for our generation.

A recent article by Alan is here.