REMIT

"The General Assembly remit to the Panel on Doctrine consideration of the growing concerns on the matter of homosexuality, and instruct the said Panel to bring forward a report to the General Assembly of 1995, in order that there may be a clear statement of the Church's position from the Biblical and Christian standpoint."

1. INTRODUCTION

Homosexuality is only one of an increasing number of ethical issues that have become the subject of widespread public debate in recent years. It is one of many aspects of human sexuality in which long-standing and sincerely held traditional values and attitudes have been subjected to sustained and searching scrutiny, and a succession of reports from a wide and representative spectrum of Christian traditions has served to highlight not only the extent of the Churches' concern but the diversity of their response to what remains a highly emotive, complex and contentious issue. Given the nature of its remit, the Panel has been obliged to focus attention on, and, consequently, give particular prominence to the issue of homosexuality, but the decision to do so should not be interpreted as an indication that the problems it reflects are different in kind or importance from any other areas of human experience in which men and women, created in the image of God, are required to make responsible use of their God-given gifts. For many homosexuality will be an issue of abstract theological interest and debate but it is the Panel's view that debate cannot be conducted without constant reference to the profound practical and pastoral implications of its conclusions. In addressing its task the Panel was continually reminded of its responsibility to provide as clear a guidance as the evidence permits; to interpret and apply that evidence in the light of the belief that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God; and to explore its remit within the context of the Church's primary commitment to 'proclaim the gospel of the love and grace of God, wherein through Jesus Christ…he freely offers to all men forgiveness and eternal life, and calls them into the fellowship and service of his kingdom'.

2. HOMOSEXUALITY

Although the term is widely used there can be no informed discussion without some agreed understanding of what it means. Therefore the Panel was obliged to investigate a range of current publications in an effort to establish how the term is used and the implication of its usage for our study. >From that initial survey it became apparent that there is a necessary distinction to be drawn between (a) the condition of the person who is identified as homosexual or homophile, and (b) the practices associated with that condition which may or may not necessarily follow. Both aspects raise important questions and require further elucidation.

In respect of (a) the current debate centres on whether or not the sexual orientation of the homosexual male or female (variously described as homophile, gay or lesbian) is a 'given' – an innate disposition directly related to genetic factors or some deeply rooted tendency implanted in the individual as a result of early childhood experiences – or a matter of genuine choice. On the basis of the former view, homosexuality is regarded as a condition which may be controlled or directed but cannot be reversed. More positively, some would argue that it is to be accepted as part of the variety of God's creation, and, as such, to be recognised as a valid form of expression for a minority of people who are, by nature, incapable of entering into an intimate heterosexual relationship. However, the reliability of such arguments and the moral attitudes associated with them are largely dependent upon medical evidence which, for the present, remains, at best, inconclusive. There is therefore no general agreement about why a minority of people are homosexually orientated but there is evidence to suggest that not all who engage in homosexual behaviour do so from choice. Similarly it would be inappropriate to assume that the homosexual orientation is necessarily a permanent or irreversible condition. It is a tendency that not uncommonly manifests itself in adolescence, and, sensitively addressed, will prove to be no more than a passing phase in a person's growth towards adulthood and a mature heterosexual orientation.

(b) While the nature and cause of a person's homosexual orientation clearly have far-reaching implications for his behaviour, it is the practices associated with the orientation that have tended to dominate the public debate. Even within Christian circles where it has been traditional to identify homosexuality as contrary to nature and to the will of God there has been a reluctance to condemn and even a willingness to commend those with homosexual or homophilic orientation who, as a result, choose to remain celibate and to eschew any form of active homosexual behaviour or relationship. Therefore it should not be assumed that all homosexuals actively engage in homosexual practices nor that those who do are necessarily any more promiscuous than their heterosexual counterparts. To suggest that all homosexuals are drug addicts or child-molesters is manifestly as untrue and misleading as to claim that all heterosexuals are faithful and monogamous. Many within the gay community would insist that the casual, irresponsible, exploitative approach to sexual relationships with all its attendant dangers is no more acceptable within a homosexual than a heterosexual context but that where the relationship is stable it need be no less caring or committed than a similar relationship between heterosexual partners. Given the seriousness and sincerity with which they are advanced, such arguments cannot be lightly dismissed but for a Church which acknowledges the Word of God contained in the Old and New Testaments as the supreme rule of faith and life it is necessary to examine them in the light of such guidance as the Bible has to offer.

3. HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE BIBLE

The Panel devoted considerable time to identifying and examining the relevant Bible texts. There are, in fact, relatively few passages that are devoted specifically to the issue of homosexual behaviour – a factor which may help to keep the matter in perspective – and, not surprisingly, none of which addresses the issue of homosexual orientation as such. The following passages, however, were considered worthy of more detailed consideration:

a) Genesis 19: 1-11, cf. Judges 19: 16-30 and Jude v.7

The story of Sodom (paralleled by a similar story relating to Gibeah and quoted in Jude), from which the term 'sodomy' is derived, describes an enigmatic incident of gang-rape, and, as such, reflects an indefensible but atypical form of homosexual behaviour.

b) Leviticus 18: 22, 20:13

Both verses contain an unequivocal condemnation of same-sex intercourse but their more general application has been questioned by some in view of its original context in the Holiness Code (Leviticus 17-26) and its possible links with outmoded practices associated with cultic male prostitution as reflected in such passages as 1 Kings 14:26, 15:12, 22:46.

c) 1 Samuel 18: 1, 20:30

These verses have been adduced as evidence in support of the claim that the much vaunted friendship between David and Jonathon was a homosexual relationship. There is, however, no hint of erotic behaviour in the Biblical text and the 'shame' described in 20:30 related to Jonathon's disloyalty to his father and family when siding with David against Saul. Indeed it was the Panel's view that the current preoccupation with homosexuality could devalue and cast unnecessary suspicion upon those wholesome relationships that are possible between same-sex friends.

d) Romans 1: 26,27

The passage is interesting for a variety of reasons. It appears unequivocal in its condemnation of homosexual behaviour. It is the only passage in which reference is made to both male and female homosexuality. It identifies homosexuality as one of the many consequences of God's judgement upon human idolatry and disaffection, and places it alongside such sins of the spirit as greed, envy, deceit, pride and gossip. It also establishes the overall context for the breakdown as the disruption of God's creative purposes. Despite suggestions that Paul's condemnation is directed more specifically to heterosexuals who had abandoned what, for them, were natural relations with women in favour of what, for them, were unnatural relationships with men, and that the particular relationships he had in mind had to do with pederasty (a practice which had no female equivalent), it is hard to resist the conclusion that Paul's words were intended to have a more general application.

e) 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11, 1 Timothy 1: 9-10

Although the two words Paul uses in the first of these passages are combined and rendered as 'homosexuals' in some translations (notably RSV), the link between them is his use of the unusual Greek word arsenokoitai. The word literally means 'those (males) who lie with males' and contains clear echoes of the Septuagint version of Leviticus 18: 22. If, as some commentators have suggested the reference is a form of male prostitution or pederasty it is all the more surprising that he did not uses one of the established words with that more restricted meaning. The fact that Paul uses two words – malakoi and arsenokoitai – in Corinthians could well be interpreted as an indication of his desire to include both active and passive homosexual behaviour in his comments.

The Panel is aware that two arguments are regularly advanced against the use of Biblical passages as evidence against current homosexual behaviour. In the first place, it is claimed that, in every case, it is possible to demonstrate that the situations addressed were quite specific and that it is inappropriate to apply these strictures in a general way to the whole range of homosexual practices and relationships in contemporary society. Secondly, it is frequently argued that it is misguided to imagine that the Bible can be expected to provide absolute and timelessly true directives from God on such practical issues as marriage and human sexuality when the Bible itself reflects the influence of changing social and cultural conditions. These are large issues that cannot usefully be explored in the abstract but the Panel has sought to demonstrate how they impinge on the passages under review and to indicate the limitations both of the evidence and of the criticisms that have been advanced. But allowing for the uncertainties surrounding the interpretation of some of the passages and accepting that some will be more applicable than others to the issues as they present themselves today, there seems little doubt that they are unanimous in their condemnation of homosexual practices.

It, was, however, the Panel's view that these passages and the negative attitudes they represent need to be seen and interpreted in the light of more positive teaching about human sexuality in Genesis 1: 26-29 and Genesis 2: 18,24 where the relationship of men and women is clearly set within the context of the purposes of God in creation. Genesis 1 establishes the sexual duality of humankind – male and female – and identifies their share in the image of God as the ultimate source of their bonding. But it is in Genesis 2 that the complementary nature of that male-female relationship is more fully developed. Neither male nor female is represented as being sufficient in himself or herself. Each is depicted as necessary to the other. It is for that reason that a man will cleave to his wife, thereby achieving that unity and fulfilment for which they were designed. It was to these same verses that Jesus was to appeal in later years when challenged to justify his attitude to divorce – an unsolicited testimonial to his belief that the difference of male and female and their sexual matching are securely rooted in the creative purpose and intention of God (Mark 10: 6-9; Matthew 19: 4-6).

4. CONCLUSION

As the Panel sought to fulfil its remit it became increasingly aware of the complexity of the issues involved and of the need to address them in a spirit of humility, understanding and compassion. In that spirit it has tried to take account of the widely differing views that are current both inside and outside the Christian community and to treat them with the seriousness they deserve. The Panel acknowledges that there are many areas of uncertainty and that medical and scientific opinion remains divided on the nature and origin of the homosexual/homophile orientation. However, the Panel cannot accept the view that all Biblical judgements against homosexual practices are so socially and culturally conditioned as to be irrelevant to today's debate nor agree that the condition is to be accepted as a normal part of the natural God-given diversity of creation. As a consequence, it cannot support the view that the homosexual/homophile orientation and its expression in sexual activity are to be regarded as a parallel and alternative form of human sexuality which, within the terms of the created order, is as valid and complete as the heterosexual. However, in rejecting the view that it is 'compatible with the Christian faith not only to love another person of the same sex but also to express that love fully in a personal sexual relationship', the Panel wishes to reaffirm its belief that homosexual people are as valuable to and valued by God as those who are heterosexual in their orientation and practice, and that the church, as a Christian community, has a major pastoral responsibility to all who find themselves in that situation. How that responsibility is exercised and expressed will depend on individual needs and circumstances but a readiness to accept people as they are is the first and most important prerequisite for change. It is in such conditions of patient understanding and openness that men and women are most open and responsive to the transforming power of God's grace which alone can bring our lives into conformity with His will as that is revealed in the Scriptures.

IN THE NAME OF THE PANEL

A. Douglas Scrimgeour Convener

John O Fulton Secretary

DELIVERANCE OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1995

1. The General Assembly accept the Report as a clear statement of the Church's position from the Biblical and Christian standpoint.

2. The General Assembly commend the Report to the Church for its further study.