4 responses to “Book Review”
-
I think you miss the point of the book Kelvin. It’s meant to be a guide to listening to *all* sides of the debate, not just those you agree with. That’s what makes the last section so good, because it forces us to deal realistically not just with the genuine evidence on the causality of homosexuality, but also the fact that some people *do* see remarkable change in their sexual orientation (and that others don’t).
-
We were not called by the last Lambeth Conference to listen to all sides in the debate.
-
Ruth Gledhill has posted a PDF of the whole thing, for those interested:
http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/files/Final.pdf -
I’ve now read the ‘scientific’ section – thanks for the link ryan – and I thought it was mixed. I thought Glynn Harrison made a serious attempt at dispassion. I think it is a fair point that any person must decide their own priorities, and the final argument must be between theologies, not sciences. I was not so impressed by David de Pomerai – though one could hardly quarrel with his conclusion that we simply do not know exactly what makes one person homosexual and the next heterosexual. However his whole argument was bedevilled by assumptions that, e.g. homosexual men will be more effeminate than straight ones. Anecdotal evidence instantly produces examples where it is the straight male siblings who are drama queens and run from spiders, while gay ones take it all in their stride.
It must be accepted that both gay and straight people live with voluntary or enforced celibacy with no ill effects – and that some people can change their sexual orientation and live happily with the change. What I found truly heart rending were the desperate attempts and the high cost to those who actually did succeed in changing orientation – however much Harrison denies the skin colour analogy, it reminded me painfully of those endless jars of skin lightener which encrust Sri Lankan chemists, where beauty is measured in skin tone. Because whether or not genetic, orientation is not a simple free choice. But I suppose the answer would be: ‘And what is?’
The final point, though, is always the same. Is Christianity a religion of an authoritative book, or an authoritative Person?
Previous Posts
-
Carmen from the wings
The BBC had a good Carmen on Radio 3 last week. I listened to it last Saturday evening whilst sitting at my computer working. (Well, that’s my story, anyway). Opera works quite well on radio. Nice music, and as we all know, the pictures are better on the radio than the telly. However, this ENO…
-
Venus as a Boy
To the Citz theatre last night to see Venus as a Boy – one of the offerings in the Glasgay festival. It is an odd play. Once we had got over a rather laboured prolog (“… And now ladies and gentlemen, the prolog”, as Mr Howerd might have said) it soon warmed up. It was…
-
Episcopal Anagrams
Time for a round of Episcopal anagrams. Its been coming on for a while. Rev Mitre Sods Joins is an anagram of Most Rev Idris Jones. [Far from the truth] Bi Rev Rants Mirth is an anagram of Rt Rev Brian Smith. [Goodness] Wild Highland Victor is an anagram of David Chillingworth. [In his dreams]…
-
High Altar for All Souls
Whilst we are on the subject of All Souls, this is what the High Altar looked like last Friday. Lots of large candles leading up to it too. Gorgeous. Oh yes, and before I forget, many thanks to the person (unknown to me) who remembered to bedeck the place with white lilies in time for…
Leave a Reply