A lot depends on how it's presented to our members and the public at large. I
have memories from the dim distant past of the newspaper reporters who appeared
at Conference just in time for the Human Sexuality debate and who couldn't get
out fast enough when that particular debate was over. Possibly, though, they
won't even notice us this time, in our diminished condition.
John Barnett
On 24 June 2021 at 10:06 Tom Osborne <mendipnomad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John B asks, , "Why go for a vote that will inevitably divide us, when we
might have been able to find a middle way?"
GiLUU *is* the middle way – it allows those who in all good conscience
hold a conservative view to continue holding that view, it makes no
requirement of Church Councils to permit same-sex marriages to occur in
property they are the Managing Trustees of if they do not wish to, it
explicitly acknowledges that we are not of one mind on this matter. The issue
is that some of a conservative mind make this issue a first order issue, an
issue on which the whole truth of our faith stands or falls, like those
issues that gave rise to the Ecumenical Creeds and to the Reformation. That
is, of course, their right, but I do not think we should necessarily be led
by that view. And we should note that not all those with “traditional views”
feel this way – the recommendations proposed have the support of people like
Ashley Cooper, who wrote them, and Paul Smith, who was heavily involved in
the journey to this point. Does anyone seriously think these are ministers of
the Gospel who have suddenly moved from being conservative evangelicals to
raging progressives? Of course not! They simply recognise that being a
community of faith requires living with contradictory convictions at times,
and that means allowing space for those who take an opposing view to live
their lives faithly in ways you would not choose to yourself.
I say again, GiLUU *is* the middle way – it makes no demand of
conservatives other than that they recognise there are other views within the
Church (which is a simple fact), and that they allow those who take a
different view to be able to live it out in ways consistent with how they
understand their faith (something we already do on other matters, including
ones that some other denominations would consider first order matters, such
as the conduct and understanding of the Lord’s Supper, or the marrying of
divorcees). I can live with those who are deeply conservative arguing that it
is a first order matter and that the whole church is imperilled if we take
any kind of compromise route, even if I disagree with them, but to suggest
that GiLUU is some lurch in a radical/liberal/progressive direction that will
automatically leave conservatives with no place to go is nonsense – and it’s
not just me who thinks that, it’s conservative evangelicals of long standing
as well, such as those I name above.
