A short while ago Paul Bayes, the Archbishop of Liverpool, commented on the Sunday programme that God never changes but what we define as holiness changes from generation to generation.  Just as the Church of England had changed its views on slavery, divorce and remarriage, it could change its attitude towards sexuality, making it far more welcoming to the LBGTI community.  For many this was a curious and surprising statement to come from someone who identifies himself as an Evangelical!

So what’s the real issue here?  At first the argument might appear intriguing, but actually the abolition of slavery was always far more in line with the teaching of scripture in the first place.  For example, if we look at Deuteronomy chapter 15, even when slavery was allowed there were ethical guidelines, slaves were to be cared for and after seven years freedom was granted.  Also the practice of kidnapping or ‘man stealing’ is forbidden in scripture (Deuteronomy 24:7), so that acts as a damning indictment of the horrendous cruelty of the slave trade to the Colonies!  The practice of divorce was recognised in the Old Testament in Deuteronomy 24:1-4, rather interestingly with an emphasis on protecting woman from the actions of irresponsible men!  Jesus commenting on this in Matthew 19: 3-9 shows that lifelong marriage with one partner is the ideal, but does not rule out divorce for acts of sexual immorality.  The word for sexual immorality here is ‘porneia’ which includes homosexual acts.  So on close inspection the Archbishops argument doesn’t stand up as the Church has generally become more in line with scripture in these areas!

But is there any argument for a redefinition of holiness at a human level?  I would argue no, on the basis of several scriptures.  The first is Leviticus 19:2: ‘And the LORD spoke to Moses saying.  “Speak to all the congregation of the people of Israel and say to them, You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy”’ This phrase has been used twice before in the book  (and is cited in 1 Peter 1:16) and is amongst some of the rather strange laws that we find in Leviticus.  If these laws seem strange to us, John Richardson rather usefully explains they are: ‘the equivalent of an Israel football shirt in a world where everyone else was wearing Gentile colours.’[1]  The key thing to remember is the word: ‘holy’ means to be ‘set apart’.  In other words even if many of these laws have run their course in the fulfilment of Christ’s work (as is explained in Matthew 5:17-18)  the Lord’s people are closely identified with him and his nature and are called to be separate from the worldliness around them.  Secondly, Romans 1:18-25 shows that the order of the world as it was first created has been subverted by man’s sin so much that in some cases men and women have given up natural sexual relations. I’m well aware that we are all sinful beings who need the love and forgiveness of God as provided by Jesus’ substitution for our sins on the cross, but even then nowhere in the Bible do we find homosexuality complimented and held up as an ideal in the way marriage between a man and woman is!

I think it’s appalling that Archbishop Paul Bayes has suffered abuse on social media over his views on sexuality.  That is hardly the definition of Christian love and we should seek to make our Churches welcoming, even when we are seeking to correct unscriptural thinking.  So can I argue for a firm and gracious response when we seek to defend scripture!  Let’s pray  for eyes to be opened to the truth of scripture when we see error.  Also let’s pray for those who seek to uphold the Evangelical faith in our Churches and witness to its saving power.  Lastly, I once heard Hebrews 13:8 summed up as the Bible in a verse: ‘Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever.’  That should be our motto and defence of the Gospel as we contend for its truth in an ever changing world!

[1] John Richardson, What God has made clean, if we can eat prawns, why is gay sex wrong? (New Malden, The Good Book Company, 2003) 12.