Scripture, Experience, and Homosexuality

Luke Timothy Johnson is a Roman Catholic biblical scholar teaching at Emory University's Candler Seminary. Although John Spong -- of whom I've been critiquing of late -- puts him on the Religious Right, Al Mohler who is on the Religious Right puts him on the Religious Left. I think Mohler is probably correct on this one --or at least Johnson is left of center in a place I likely find myself.

But that's not the point -- the point is the role of scripture in dealing with important life issues -- including homosexuality. Johnson writes that the debate over homosexuality isn't about sex at all, but about Scripture and how we interpret it. This is why Mohler gets in a tizzy.

In an article published earlier this summer in Commonweal, Johnson addresses head on this issue in a way that I find very helpful. He writes that he's not interested in trying to get around the biblical commands, but instead calls on us to be courageous enough to face this issue head on. He writes:

I think it important to state clearly that we do, in fact, reject the straightforward commands of Scripture, and appeal instead to another authority when we declare that same-sex unions can be holy and good. And what exactly is that authority? We appeal explicitly to the weight of our own experience and the experience thousands of others have witnessed to, which tells us that to claim our own sexual orientation is in fact to accept the way in which God has created us. By so doing, we explicitly reject as well the premises of the scriptural statements condemning homosexuality-namely, that it is a vice freely chosen, a symptom of human corruption, and disobedience to God’s created order.

Though commending Johnson for his honesty and clarity, this statement leads Mohler to respond:

Professor Johnson's argument leads to disaster. Indeed, it is a disaster in itself, justifying what the Bible condemns as sinful. Nevertheless, his rejectionist approach to the authority of the Bible's commands is remarkably -- even breathtakingly -- honest. We could only wish that others would be equally honest.

Johnson's point is that we've trod this trail before with regard to slavery -- where by and large Scripture doesn't speak against it -- and the role of women. Where Scripture is clearly contradicts the witness of human experience, we must listen to that experience and ask where it leads -- is God speaking through it? And in insisting on listening for the voice of the living God, Johnson points to biblical precedent -- of Jesus and of Paul, to name two, who offer us an example of letting God open up a new vista.

He writes here -- explaining this new vista and offers up a reason why he must take this route:

Many of us who stand for the full recognition of gay and lesbian persons within the Christian communion find ourselves in a position similar to that of the early abolitionists-and of the early advocates for women’s full and equal roles in church and society. We are fully aware of the weight of scriptural evidence pointing away from our position, yet place our trust in the power of the living God to reveal as powerfully through personal experience and testimony as through written texts. To justify this trust, we invoke the basic Pauline principle that the Spirit gives life but the letter kills (2 Corinthians 3:6). And if the letter of Scripture cannot find room for the activity of the living God in the transformation of human lives, then trust and obedience must be paid to the living God rather than to the words of Scripture.

For me this is no theoretical or academic position, but rather a passionate conviction. It is one many of us have come to through personal struggle, and for some, real suffering. In my case, I trusted that God was at work in the life of one of my four daughters, who struggled against bigotry to claim her sexual identity as a lesbian. I trusted God was at work in the life she shares with her partner-a long-lasting and fruitful marriage dedicated to the care of others, and one that has borne fruit in a wonderful little girl who is among my and my wife’s dear grandchildren. I also trusted the many stories of students and friends whose life witnessed to a deep faith in God but whose bodies moved sexually in ways different from the way my own did. And finally I began to appreciate the ways in which my own former attitudes and language had helped to create a world where family, friends, and students were treated cruelly.

This is a lengthy article that deserves close reading -- not just these snippets -- but I think upon close reading you will find yourself, if not agreeing, at least put in a position to consider carefully this call to listen for God's voice in resolving this important issue facing the church and society. For Johnson it was the experience of his daughter, for me it was that of my brother. In that experience, he, like me, heard the voice of God leading in a new direction.

If we're to take Scripture serioiusly and accept it as the norming norm of our faith, as I do, we still must deal with the question of how to read and apply it in this day and age. As we saw with slavery, experience has shown us that Scripture (and the culture in which it was written) is not in touch with the God we worship. To fully accept its direction we must, it seems, say no to it and embrace the direction God is leading us.

Hat tip to Jesus Politics, which clued me into the Mohler article that references and responds to Johnson!